▲ 284 ▼ Sovcit is getting foreclosed on, will buy a new house with 10 silver coins. (lemmy.world) submitted 1 year ago by BonesOfTheMoon@lemmy.world to c/insanepeoplefacebook@lemmy.world 123 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] zarkanian@sh.itjust.works 13 points 1 year ago (3 children) But surely this person isn't so dumb Ah, so this is your first encounter with sovcits? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] Endymion_Mallorn@kbin.melroy.org 5 points 1 year ago (2 children) Sadly no, but my first encounter with one who's this far down the rabbit hole. Usually it's just creative tax dodges and exploitation of every loophole that I run into - stuff like creating a 501 nonprofit corporation to buy a thing, voting yourself off the board, and declaring bankruptcy (I forget which chapter at the moment), so that basically the creditors get told (legally) to go jump in a lake. It's madness, but it's plausible. And it has worked at least once. That's the level I usually see them at. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] setsneedtofeed@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago (1 child) That has less of a sovcit texture and more of a sane, but dishonest and scummy person trying to get something for nothing. Sovereign Citizens are a special genus where beliefs tend to among other things fixate on a separation of a paper and "real" person, common citation of common law, common incorrect citation of Federal law in state matters, and fixation on treating all legal interactions as if they were contractual exchanges. I don't think I've ever seen anything that's normally considered sovcit nonsense win in a court. Very occasionally the sovcit wins in spite of themselves, but the actual arguments didn't help. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Endymion_Mallorn@kbin.melroy.org 2 points 1 year ago* Well, in a certain sideways sense, every legal interaction kinda is a matter of contract. The problem is that you don't get the right to choose whether you're a signatory or not, and the other party has the right to amend or update the contract at any time they choose. The problem is, unless you're a signatory to at least one of those contracts (by birth or by immigration), you have no rights at all. Once you're in, you really can't get out safely. Basically your birth certificate is the checkbox on the EULA of lawdul society. Good Lord, I hate that I just thought of it that way, but it works so well as an analogy. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Endymion_Mallorn@kbin.melroy.org 5 points 1 year ago (2 children) Sadly no, but my first encounter with one who's this far down the rabbit hole. Usually it's just creative tax dodges and exploitation of every loophole that I run into - stuff like creating a 501 nonprofit corporation to buy a thing, voting yourself off the board, and declaring bankruptcy (I forget which chapter at the moment), so that basically the creditors get told (legally) to go jump in a lake. It's madness, but it's plausible. And it has worked at least once. That's the level I usually see them at. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] setsneedtofeed@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago (1 child) That has less of a sovcit texture and more of a sane, but dishonest and scummy person trying to get something for nothing. Sovereign Citizens are a special genus where beliefs tend to among other things fixate on a separation of a paper and "real" person, common citation of common law, common incorrect citation of Federal law in state matters, and fixation on treating all legal interactions as if they were contractual exchanges. I don't think I've ever seen anything that's normally considered sovcit nonsense win in a court. Very occasionally the sovcit wins in spite of themselves, but the actual arguments didn't help. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Endymion_Mallorn@kbin.melroy.org 2 points 1 year ago* Well, in a certain sideways sense, every legal interaction kinda is a matter of contract. The problem is that you don't get the right to choose whether you're a signatory or not, and the other party has the right to amend or update the contract at any time they choose. The problem is, unless you're a signatory to at least one of those contracts (by birth or by immigration), you have no rights at all. Once you're in, you really can't get out safely. Basically your birth certificate is the checkbox on the EULA of lawdul society. Good Lord, I hate that I just thought of it that way, but it works so well as an analogy. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] setsneedtofeed@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago (1 child) That has less of a sovcit texture and more of a sane, but dishonest and scummy person trying to get something for nothing. Sovereign Citizens are a special genus where beliefs tend to among other things fixate on a separation of a paper and "real" person, common citation of common law, common incorrect citation of Federal law in state matters, and fixation on treating all legal interactions as if they were contractual exchanges. I don't think I've ever seen anything that's normally considered sovcit nonsense win in a court. Very occasionally the sovcit wins in spite of themselves, but the actual arguments didn't help. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Endymion_Mallorn@kbin.melroy.org 2 points 1 year ago* Well, in a certain sideways sense, every legal interaction kinda is a matter of contract. The problem is that you don't get the right to choose whether you're a signatory or not, and the other party has the right to amend or update the contract at any time they choose. The problem is, unless you're a signatory to at least one of those contracts (by birth or by immigration), you have no rights at all. Once you're in, you really can't get out safely. Basically your birth certificate is the checkbox on the EULA of lawdul society. Good Lord, I hate that I just thought of it that way, but it works so well as an analogy. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Endymion_Mallorn@kbin.melroy.org 2 points 1 year ago* Well, in a certain sideways sense, every legal interaction kinda is a matter of contract. The problem is that you don't get the right to choose whether you're a signatory or not, and the other party has the right to amend or update the contract at any time they choose. The problem is, unless you're a signatory to at least one of those contracts (by birth or by immigration), you have no rights at all. Once you're in, you really can't get out safely. Basically your birth certificate is the checkbox on the EULA of lawdul society. Good Lord, I hate that I just thought of it that way, but it works so well as an analogy. permalink fedilink source parent