top check point refusals

[Jaynelson]

Y'know....a few years ago I would have quickly written this off as hippy BS as many of you are. Now.....I can't say I'm in 100% agreement, however, there are some pretty fair points raised here.

I can honestly say there have been exactly 2 times in my life where I have requested the help of police when myself and my spouse felt threatened. In both cases, the police were 100% useless....not willing to put forth one ounce of effort, or even mask an attempt to give a damn. HOWEVER, there never seems to be any lack of interest in them "just doing their job" trying to bait law-abiding people into slipping up at some stupid check point/DUI stop/speed trap/whatever. Don't care about some guy with a huge record sneaking around our old house waiting to attack me/my girl when we got home....but more than willing to ruin some poor basterd's life because he drank 2 beers after work and drove home. Wow thanks for the help.

Like beard said....the gov/police works FOR you in theory, as opposed to AGAINST you and that does seem to be less and less the case. I'm not sure this is the best way to go about change....that said, maybe it's as good as any? From my personal experience, I see them as no help whatsoever....so if they are of no use to me, then just leave me alone. That would definitely seem a basic right....to not be harassed when you are doing nothing wrong.

I know this goes further/deeper than that, but just relating to personal experience. It's interesting stuff.

 

[Snowmow]

Well said.
Law dogs around here are the same. Given the chance to help, 90% of them won't. It's getting bad

 

[Jaynelson]

Well said.
Law dogs around here are the same. Given the chance to help, 90% of them won't. It's getting bad

And honestly....I'm friends with a few cops, and they are great guys. I don't think the problem is with the individuals....I think the whole process/system is just f'd (not exactly news).

The gov figured out a long time ago that there is no money in busting real criminals. Most are broke anyways.....give some crackhead a fine for stealing your stuff....what are the chances of him paying? The non-broke one's either don't get caught, get off, or weren't doing anything worth prosecuting in the first place. So the focus has changed from keeping the bad guys away from the good guys.....to simply collecting extra taxes. Cleaner, safer, much more lucrative. Given that the entire concept of policing is paid for entirely by the public, that is just totally wrong.

 

[beard]

These civil rights are not equal or on par with our natural rights. Not by a long shot.


Financial Administration Act Charges for rights and privileges 19.1 The Governor in Council may, on the recommendation of the Treasury Board, · (a) by regulation prescribe the fees or charges to be paid for a right or privilege conferred by or on behalf of Her Majesty in right of Canada, by means of a licence, permit or other authorization, by the persons or classes of persons on whom the right or privilege is conferred; or

· (b) authorize the appropriate Minister to prescribe by order those fees or charges, subject to such terms and conditions as may be specified by the Governor in Council.


Civil Code Article 50
Every person(incorporated)has a name which is assigned to him at birth and is stated in his act of birth.

You see as a juridical personality (legal person) the name that you use has been assigned to you. This means that you are not the creator, author or owner of the name. For something to be assigned there must be an assignor and an assignee. This relationship brings forth obligations concerning the usage of this assigned name.

You see what happens is at birth there is a live record of your birth that takes place. Your parents gift you a name (human being) either a Christian name or not but it is a gifted name. On our live record of birth it indicates that the name our parents gave us is a gifted name representing the Human being. However in the act of birth the name is no longer a gifted name but an assigned name (for the legal person).

Civil Code Article 75 The domicile of a person, for the exercise of his civil rights, is at the place of his principal establishment. Now you notice that the domicile of this person (legal person) with the assigned name is not for living but for performing the exercise of his civil rights. They are trying to say that the incorporated person who resides at your home is there not to pursue happiness not to enjoy life but to exercise civil rights.

International laws finding their expression in the Quebec Civil Code.

Civil Code Article 2806 No proof is required of a matter of which judicial notice shall be taken.

Civil Code Article 2807 Judicial notice shall be taken of the law in force in Québec. However, statutory instruments in force in Québec but not published in the Gazette officielle du Québec or in any other manner prescribed by law, international treaties and agreements applicable to Québec but not contained in a text of law, and customary international law, shall be pleaded.

As you can see International treaties and agreements must be pleaded in Quebec,

Civil Code Article 2809 Judicial notice may be taken of the law of other provinces or territories of Canada and of that of a foreign state, provided it has been pleaded. The court may also require that proof be made of such law; this may be done, among other means, by expert testimony or by the production of a certificate drawn up by a jurisconsult. Where such law has not been pleaded or its content has not been established, the court applies the law in force in Québec.

Civil Code Article 2812 Copies of statutes which have been or are in force in Canada, attested by a competent public officer or published by an authorized publisher, make proof of the existence and content of such statutes, and neither the signature or seal appended to such a copy nor the quality of the officer or publisher need be proved.


knowledge is power,