It's not a fake code, but it clearly doesn't apply to them because there are other sections of the statute that do.
They just think that if they classify themselves as "non-commercial," they don't have to register their vehicles, but section l of that statute defines specifically what exactly a passenger vehicle is.
They will cherrypick specific sections because someone else told them to and not read anything else.
You're right that they probably meant to cite Idaho § 49-123 (2)(k) that defines non-commerical vehicles, but the (2) in that citation is not optional lol
I love the "$10,000 Fine" disclaimer. They go to such great pains to explain how they are exempt from all commonly applicable laws, just to immediately undermine it all by proposing a fine that could only ever be recouped via the same legal system that they are claiming to be exempt from.
It's because contracts require the consent of both people!
They didn't sign the contract that would require them to pay taxes, but by reading the "$10,000 Fine" and doing things anyway, the reader has consented to the implicit contract and is thus fully liable to pay.
They're a sovcit, but I guess they're not ready to jump on in to the water. Gotta test temperature and depth slowly. One day, they'll get rid of their license plates.
Out of curiosity, I looked up this code, and the only thing it seems to be about is different classifications of registered vehicles, per Idaho law. It doesn’t “exempt” the vehicle from anything as far as I can tell, nor does it seem to point to any codified rules or regulations that would justify any kind of fee. My biggest question, really, is “exempt from what?” The only thing I could think of is having to have a valid driver’s license to operate the vehicle, but there’s nothing I could find in this law that would exempt them from that
Or they may have just gotten back from Safelite and gotten the registration (and of course, they have insurance in order to get that registration) and they just didn’t remove the bumper stickers.
“Because you are sovereign, I cannot repair your car / allow you to park / shop here / use our business without first signing the disclaimer NDA trademark acknowledgement summary judgement LLC provisional acceptance advisory. It’s only 12 pages.”
Yep. If you see a Cop tell him the driver wanted to know if his license would satisfy the requirements for a Real I.D. Should be an interesting encounter if the driver returns.
That ought to be good for driving without proper registration. Pretty certain that will also result in citations for no valid driver's license and no insurance. The wild card would be driving while suspended.
Yup, sovcits call that the Civil Peace Flag and pretend it's the correct flag to fly in peacetime with the Stars and Stripes to be flown only in time of war. It's loosely based on the Coast Guard Ensign which itself came from the Revenue Cutter Ensign.
Well their use of idaho code 49 is wrong, there is no mention of automobile anywhere, only vehicles. Are they saying they ARE a vehicle and thus subject to state codes??????????
Here is link to a case from 2012 that has been cited widely across several different legal systems as an example of the what, where and how of Sovcitery, if you will. The ruling of the case has withstood multiple appeals. The term used by the Judge is "Organized Pseudolegal Comercial Argument' or OPCA. Has also been used as a source for other judgments in Canada.
jeez. it was in no way a definition. it was one guys idea of the mindset of the people that are labeled that. also, it was CANADA. If it was a legal definition it has nothing to do with the US.
I mean you didn't understand my question to begin with. Is there a definition of this term passed by a actual legislature that actually makes and passes law. You did not provide this at all. You cited an opinion of a judge that other judges may or may not reference.
Hey that’s a new one! I believe it is a sovcit. Are there gold fringes on the wheel wells?
Definitely nothing that fancy on that vehicle 😆
It a 2C?
How'd you know lol
They added "American Civilian". Now that's a new one for me!
That flag with the inverted stripes is a symbol i have only seen a couple times, but its definitely a Sovcidiot thing.
There's someone down the street from me who flies that flag.
They are almost certainly a Sovcidiot
Wait until they see my "$1b fee per fee schedule" schedule
Fee per each fee per fee schedule
Don't hurt his fee fees.
fee feces
Double stamp, no erasies!
My fee schedule! Triple stamped it no erasies. Touch blue make it true.
You can't triple stamp a double stamp! YOU CAN'T TRIPLE STAMP A DOUBLE STAMP!!
LALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALA
I always love the fake code citations
It's not a fake code, but it clearly doesn't apply to them because there are other sections of the statute that do.
They just think that if they classify themselves as "non-commercial," they don't have to register their vehicles, but section l of that statute defines specifically what exactly a passenger vehicle is.
They will cherrypick specific sections because someone else told them to and not read anything else.
And that is why they're stupid on purpose.
You're right that they probably meant to cite Idaho § 49-123 (2)(k) that defines non-commerical vehicles, but the (2) in that citation is not optional lol
You are correct - my bad! :D
Shit. I (safely in the U.S.) haven't declared myself a non-combatant. Should I hurry up and do that??
Non-combatant. 😄
It's meaningless unless you put it on a bumper sticker. Do you even sov cit bro? 😂
Definitely a sovcit. Looks like some flavor of American National.
Revolutionary War "Sons of Liberty" prior to declaration of war.
I’m sorry, what?
This is a pre- Revolutionary War flag of historic value. Study your history. This flag like other was banned by the British.
It’s not, though. It may they were inspired by it, but this is not that.
I love the "$10,000 Fine" disclaimer. They go to such great pains to explain how they are exempt from all commonly applicable laws, just to immediately undermine it all by proposing a fine that could only ever be recouped via the same legal system that they are claiming to be exempt from.
It's because they believe that laws are a magic system, and so if they learn to say the right words in a courtroom, they will win.
I don't think they could comprehend the paradox.
It's because contracts require the consent of both people!
They didn't sign the contract that would require them to pay taxes, but by reading the "$10,000 Fine" and doing things anyway, the reader has consented to the implicit contract and is thus fully liable to pay.
Or something.
This bozo needs to increase that fee schedule, for obvious comedy. Cuz $10K don't really seem intimidating
They're a sovcit, but I guess they're not ready to jump on in to the water. Gotta test temperature and depth slowly. One day, they'll get rid of their license plates.
Non combatant
I would say that generally the cops don't care about your bumper stickers if you have a legal plate.
Yes, but what if you don’t have a valid driver’s license?
Who’s going to levy that fine asshole?
Out of curiosity, I looked up this code, and the only thing it seems to be about is different classifications of registered vehicles, per Idaho law. It doesn’t “exempt” the vehicle from anything as far as I can tell, nor does it seem to point to any codified rules or regulations that would justify any kind of fee. My biggest question, really, is “exempt from what?” The only thing I could think of is having to have a valid driver’s license to operate the vehicle, but there’s nothing I could find in this law that would exempt them from that
Exempt from reality.
That checks out
Oh, you know, just generally exempt. 🙃
I love how this sub just roasts them
Not exempt from roasting apparently
They're just definitions. Section (2)(l) clearly states what nearly all of them drive.
Why just $10,000. Surely, they're devaluing their time. Add a few zeros. Have some dignity!
By "$" they mean "pounds of gold", which is the only real currency!
My guess is that it’s the driver that doesn’t have a valid license any more, though the car may be properly registered.
Or they may have just gotten back from Safelite and gotten the registration (and of course, they have insurance in order to get that registration) and they just didn’t remove the bumper stickers.
“Because you are sovereign, I cannot repair your car / allow you to park / shop here / use our business without first signing the disclaimer NDA trademark acknowledgement summary judgement LLC provisional acceptance advisory. It’s only 12 pages.”
Yep. If you see a Cop tell him the driver wanted to know if his license would satisfy the requirements for a Real I.D. Should be an interesting encounter if the driver returns.
That ought to be good for driving without proper registration. Pretty certain that will also result in citations for no valid driver's license and no insurance. The wild card would be driving while suspended.
and/or drunk.
you know, the laws don't affect them so why not?
Yup, sovcits call that the Civil Peace Flag and pretend it's the correct flag to fly in peacetime with the Stars and Stripes to be flown only in time of war. It's loosely based on the Coast Guard Ensign which itself came from the Revenue Cutter Ensign.
Yep!
Yeah, that should work. 🤣
You sure did!
Who are they fining?
The cop who smashes the window, reaches in, and hauls them out.
Wait, what is this crap? Nvm, I dont want to know what this dilation Alex Jones subscribers are up to.
“Non combatant” lol what
“Non Combatant”… I feel like that’s kind of a new/novel one?
Simple. Idaho.
And YEAH you did. You aren't confused, as usual they are.
I gather this one is trying to avoid traffic tickets and parking fines. Lol
Good luck trying to collect the 10k fine.
Well their use of idaho code 49 is wrong, there is no mention of automobile anywhere, only vehicles. Are they saying they ARE a vehicle and thus subject to state codes??????????
what is the legal definition of a sovcit? Can anyone provide a link to a statute or law passed by a state government or the federal government
That's like asking for the legal definition of "dumb shit." There isn't one, but you'll know it when you see it.
Oh so it’s a term that was just made up and has no real meaning. Got it.
That's correct, it's made up. Just like 99% of a sovcit's beliefs.
Well, the FBI did a pretty good job explaining why they’re considered domestic terrorists:
https://archives.fbi.gov/archives/news/stories/2010/april/sovereigncitizens_041310/domestic-terrorism-the-sovereign-citizen-movement
Here is link to a case from 2012 that has been cited widely across several different legal systems as an example of the what, where and how of Sovcitery, if you will. The ruling of the case has withstood multiple appeals. The term used by the Judge is "Organized Pseudolegal Comercial Argument' or OPCA. Has also been used as a source for other judgments in Canada.
https://www.canlii.org/en/ab/abqb/doc/2012/2012abqb571/2012abqb571.html
you can check it if you want under 'Meeds vs Meeds'.
Canada? lol
Let’s stick to countries without the Crown.
and reveal that you in no way read any of what you asked for.
troll.
jeez. it was in no way a definition. it was one guys idea of the mindset of the people that are labeled that. also, it was CANADA. If it was a legal definition it has nothing to do with the US.
and yet it has been cited in cases there. as an example of what Sovcit is. In other words, just what you asked for. stop trying to move the goalposts.
you could move on to straight up denial but I am hoping for a rage quit from you, troll.
I mean you didn't understand my question to begin with. Is there a definition of this term passed by a actual legislature that actually makes and passes law. You did not provide this at all. You cited an opinion of a judge that other judges may or may not reference.
And there we have it.
Goal posts have been moved!
Oh geez, another one.