Benjammin Posted November 1, 2013 Posted November 1, 2013 I am sure that this kind of story has been run in other markets but this is the first time that I have heard of it in mine (I don't have a TV and surely do not watch the "news"). I am appreciate allot of the ideas that these folks have but then at the same time I do not like the idea of using violence. Surely they only resort to that because is what they were taught. What do you all think? Are you seeing this kind of story where you are? http://kstp.com/news/stories/S3206162.shtml?cat=127
Wesley Posted November 1, 2013 Posted November 1, 2013 2 gangs Both say the other is crazier Both say the other is violent Both say they are following just law Yea, I just want no part of it. The sovereign citizens (at least as portrayed in the article) are not exactly philosophically sound. It is not just the use of violence. Sovereigns like Hudson believe America has been transformed from a republic into a democracy, shifting from self-government to a dictatorship, and from God's common law to unconstitutional statutory law. Therefore, Ideally we would have a constitutional republic ruled by God. No thanks. I do not wish to die.
endostate Posted November 1, 2013 Posted November 1, 2013 Sovereign denotes independence from outside authority.Citizen denotes the link between a man and a state authority.Which is it? Interesting seminar on the topic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=flslzBYYWdE Bursting Bubbles of Government Deception (1:21:06)
vivosmith Posted November 2, 2013 Posted November 2, 2013 It may work in the foothills of the Dakotas, but unless you want to be a minimalist, I think it is unworkable at best. Add to that the violence bit, and I think you have trouble. If you want the public on your side, you need force the authorities to use undue force against you (or at least make it look like that), and then gain sympathy. Exhibit A , Tibet
Recommended Posts