to think the 'common law/freeman on the land' thing is a whole load of bollocks?

[qwertypop]

I've come across a few people over the last few years that take it very seriously and bang on at length about how the police and courts have no authority over them as they are self declared 'freemen'. Something to do with common law being the only true law in Britain, I think? And not having to wear bike helmets or pay for TV licenses or repay your debts also seem important to the ones I've had the dubious pleasure of meeting.

A couple I met at the weekend have taken the biscuit though and not registered their baby's birth because apparently this will mean said baby grows up to be a 'freeman' (she's actually a girl but the term appears to be freeman anyway). They believe quite firmly that to register her birth will mean that the law assumes her and her name (which is a fucking corker, of course) are one and the same and that only by NOT registering her birth can she be free to be a human being. Quite what this actually means is a mystery to me and tbh the mumbo jumbo they gave me by way of an answer leads me to suspect they don't really know either

I've tried to read up on it but all the info I can find is written in a style you'd expect of an paranoid, delusional, and possibly hallucinating chimpanzee let loose with a legal dictionary.

So AIBU to think this is bollocky woo of the most fucking ridiculous type? Or is someone going to come along and actually enlighten me as to wtf its all about, preferably in plain English with no pseudo-legalese?

The Magna Carta is really interesting as a historical document. I'll have to have a browse of it again, there is some really good insights into the medieval life. It is, as stated above, nothing to do with general rights but to do with the barons getting sick of John extorting money from them under any pretense he could.

I was always told that the Magna Carta was significant because it proved that the king was subject to law, just the same as everyone else.

yes it was and to recognise the equal rights of everyone, even though he after a few mounts after he decided to ignore the charta.

Right, micqdc, and your ownership of a stamp album equates to a dog's willingness to fight for food it is enjoying? Dogs don't refer to rights of ownership - strongest wins.

You are kidding me.

Sorry, I don't like all the spelling cracks and I'm sorry about that.

But you're kidding? You think the Magna Carta was to recognise the equal rights of everyone?

I never said the bill of right is still in full force I said the declaration of rights is.

I know it's the wrong era, but has anyone else got this in their heads now?

micdq - one of my friends has recently has part of her cervix chopped off to remove cancer.

are you actually suggesting that she should have used cannabis oil instead of having surgery?

LRDtheFeministDragon - yes it was where what started us on a path to human rights.

watch this

You guys know that arguing with this woo is like trying to nail jelly to a wall. Right?

I have done my research thank you, I spent a good part of my youth protesting and fighting against 'the man'

But the way to change these things is not to drop out, it is to get involved, volunteer instead of protest with your time. Make people aware of the awful wars we get embroiled in; this is working anyway because we are just about to leave Afghanistan.

I pay my taxes because I have a job that supports my family and I am proud of that, I am glad we have a state that supports people when they need it and is supporting me while I need it.

Its very interesting that it is written in law that the Royal Family should pay for the army, have you considered getting a petition together and have it talked about parliament? Or do you just rant about it occasionally online?

My issue with the 'free thinkers' is as simple as their lack of action towards anything productive. If you want to change things then get involved and change them, don't drop out and expect sitting in a field is going to do anything. I know loads of people who went to a Frack Free festival in Bristol a week before the election, happy to turn out to take acid and look at trees but not prepared to make the effort to vote in the election for a party who will ban fracking. It is a leisure pursuit not a movement.

I've just seen the post by Micqdc at 14:16 and I'm going to have a lie down.

You are talking about research? Research the origins of the Civil List. You can start here but other, peer reviewed, respected and official sources are available. As a result of The Glorious Revolution (which included that fucking Bill of Rights) the royals do not pay for military expenditure.

All offers of chamomile accepted.

Same with cannabis oil, why not gather enough support to have it researched properly? Hell why not do a doctorate if you are that sure and be the change that you want to see?

Because its easy to strum away on a ukelele about 'the man' than it is to actually change the world.

Oh, no, no, no.

I'm joining lisa in the 'ouch, history' corner.

The magna carta and equal rights for everyone.

penguins - yes, but it's so compelling, darn it. It's the sheer wrongness.

I will say, I am particularly enjoying this as a feminist. I do love how women obviously don't exist here.

I am quite eager to see this law regarding the royals and the army.

I've never heard about it before, do you have a proper link Mc?

YouAreMyFavouriteWasteOfTime - I understand that if a cancer gets big you can just cut it out depending on the location, what im saying is that treatments such as kimo therapy would be better if you just used cannabis oil or other natural treatments.

Cannabis oil is better than chemotherapy? Ladies and gentlemen, we have a winner....

You guys know that arguing with this woo is like trying to nail jelly to a wall.

Ah, but don't you realise that it's not true that you can't nail jelly to a wall? It's a lie perpetuated by state-controlled media. Just do your research!

nomorequotes - theirs no pdf of it as it seams like they are trying to suppress it but you can see the original paper in London.

as for a link this is a website with people who have gone and wrote it up on their site here www.tpuc.org/the-declaration-of-rights-16889/
its the original text of what the bill of rights was based on.

Oh so it exists on a document dating from 1633, nothing a bit more current we can have a look at?

As pointed out by various lawyers far more on the ball about this than me, these ancient laws are not relevant now. They have no power over me.

PenguinsHatchedAnEgg - I think I need to put down my hammer. But...

The Magna Carta was about protecting the rights of the barons. It really wasn't about respecting rights of all. It was against the arbitrary imprisonment and fining of the barons. It was about the king having to be accountable to the peers. Most people were only affected when serfdom withered away. If you were not able to bring your case to the King's court (which most people at that time weren't, they were subject to manorial courts which no longer exist) then the Magna Carta didn't apply.

The Magna Carta is a great document. It is important in the growth of parliamentary democracy. It is important for the growth of the rule of law. It is important that it paves the way for open and fair trials within the law. It is one reason why we never had the lettres de cachet that the French had and were so abused in the run up to the French Revolution. It is the start of a journey that means that the law of England and Wales applies to everyone regardless of religion, gender or wealth. Fundamentally it is about the rule of law.

This includes the laws about income tax.

But seriously, if you truly believe these things to be important, what are you doing to change the world?

Fucking cannabis oil...

Cancer doesn't work like that. It really doesn't. Please tell me that you do understand that, please. If you have symptoms ffs please see a qualified medical doctor.

I'm starting to whimper in a corner.

The wiki page is one of the best I've read in ages, including such gems as:

'The freeman position is not entirely lacking in moral force: considering government-created law to be a damnable imposition is a defensible stance with a long and respectable history. But their theory of the world is utterly spurious, and their practical approach is made entirely of magic beans and crack.'

I read a book about cannon law once. It was explosive stuff.