This makes as much sense as “I walked backwards into the office before meeting my caseworker so now my ex-wife owes ME child support”
Speaking of which, it’s bad enough that this is insane, but so much worse that, to this person, finding a loophole is more important than aiding the survival of the human being they created.
Wait, there IS one thing worse: the crowds of idiots in this group who will, no doubt, cheer this on.
There are two things that are worse.
Having this loser as your absent father, and worse than that having this loser as your non-absent father.
to this person, finding a loophole is more important than aiding the survival of the human being they created.
ikr isn’t their kid a sovereign citizen too?
Oh wait maybe their kid’s “an enemy or an ally to an enemy.”
ikr isn’t their kid a sovereign citizen too?
Not if they have birth certificates or social security numbers, in that case, they’re doomed
“she paused for 10 seconds” yes. Well. As one does when trying to understand gibberish.
It’s big steppa season!
I had a guy who was dipping his toes into sovcit stuff when I worked in child support. He owed his ex 6 figures and first he tried stuff like, “she told me she wants to forgive it, can you send me the paperwork she needs so I can give it to her?” When that didn’t work, he started asking things like when did he agree to our state having jurisdiction and since he never consented, the case was invalid. Then he asked for a form that was clearly made up but the name was classic sovcit magic spell nonsense. When I told him it didn’t exist and asked what he was trying to do, he stopped replying.
When I left, he still hadn’t found the magic words. Pretty sure he’ll die owing that woman money. He wasn’t as bad as the mom veering into qanon who accused me of trafficking her children, though. It became real obvious, real fast how her ex and his family had permanent restraining orders.
Just want to clarify - the sovcit dad and qanon mom were completely different cases, right? PLEASE tell me that the kids have at least one sane parent.
Ha yes, and neither of them even lived in the same state as their kids, which was really for the best.
The craziest part of this shit, is they really think it’s this simple and everyone isn’t doing it
Like, if shit was this easy, wouldn’t a lawyer somewhere use this shit and make ridiculous money?
They’re always completely convinced their methods work. I joined a bunch of their stupid groups and gave them bogus advice which they ate up with a spoon.
wouldn’t it be great if you were reading some of their legal transcripts and found seeds of your bullshit and then later found it in the actual court proceedings with the judge trashing them
I’m already starting to see them talk about things my friend and I have told them in their nuttery. One thing we’ve been trying to convince them of is that they need a postal stamp with a fox on it as it’s the seal of the great councillor of admiralty (which I made up out of my ass), and they’re assuring each other they all do it. It’s hilarious. My friend uses Chat GPT to create sovcit content for them.
Would love to see that content! I end up wasting ridiculous time watching sovcits on YouTube. I’d much rather read their lunatic rambling.
There’s a group called Sovereign Services 1099A, and one called American State Nationals. As long as you keep quiet they don’t notice people are just there to watch their crazy.
Sacha Baron Cohen-level trolling.
They think the law is magic and if they find the right combination of words they can cast a legal spell.
It’s just a matter of reciting the right incantation.
“It’s levi-OH-sa, not levio-SAH.”
Yeah they should know that the real magic in the legal system is done with money.
to be fair, what you describedis how the law works so it’s understandable they’re confused.
TBH, I wonder if it’s a matter of the law being impenetrable for normal humans.
Since they can’t understand the system as it’s presented, they’re trying to build their own understanding and tools from scraps and quackery.
It’s like when people resorted to alchemy, fey, and God Of Lightning theories before we had accessible science.
Except science got more acessible. There are galaxies of free, high quality resources designed to help laypeople understand science, while the law becomes ever more inconclusive, esoteric, and buried behind “beware of the leopard” warnings.
No it’s more about how the state justifies enforcement the law and jurisdiction. This all started with the Moors and the whole jurisdiction argument. The Moors argue that there is no law of man that supercedes god so they used to go into court and argue under what jurisdiction granted by God did the court have. Obv it is none so the Moors argued that the court establishing jurisdiction was a violation of Moors constitutional rights.
Further complicating things is the assumption of a contract. Technically none of us agreed to be bound by laws just by being born here. So how can the state assert you agreed not to break these laws? The state is saying u broke a contract that you technically never agreed to.
To complicate things even further the law is not applied equally. Police and judges are 100% discretionary if they want to be.
So in their minds the cops don’t have to enforce anything and what they’re enforcing is a contract the person getting arrested or charged never agreed to in the first place.
I think you may be going down the SovCit rabbit hole yourself.
Yes, that’s basically accurate for contracts. Actual law does not require you to consent to it. An entity with the authority and ability to unilaterally create and enforce law is basically the definition of a government. By existing within their territory, you are subject to their jurisdiction.
Many countries do not have a formal constitution. The constitution is a limit on the powers of government, not the source of the powers in the first place.
I’m not. Amazing how just stating their arguments is somehow interpreted by obviously unintelligent people as promotion of those concepts.
The law is a contract. Whether you like it or not. The state is required to notify the public of law changes. This is an assumed meeting of the minds. That is the literal foundation of contracts.
The Constitution is in no way a limitation of powers. It’s an outline of the structures of a democratic system.
You, ma’am, are very very confused.
The state is required to notify the public because the state has decided it is required to notify the public, and the constitution, formal or informal, sets out that requirement.
In parts of history and the world, there is/was no such requirement. The Sovereign’s word is law, with no need for statute to be published or breached.
A contract needs both parties to agree to it, and to any changes, not just be notified. Laws are unilateral.
“Congress shall make no law” is the most basic of restraints. Yes, there are other parts mandating how aspects of the government shall be operated. That’s because the US government was formed with a written constitution, more-or-less fully formed.
In governments that evolved over more centuries, like the UK (and I believe pre-CCP China), the initial assumption/assertion is that the sovereign has supreme executive power. Statute and case law may restrict this, and transfer power to the other branches of government that are formed - but theoretically, power flows from the grace of god, the mandate of heaven, or more practically the tip of a sword. The state has a monopoly on violence.
I’m also not sure why you think I’m a woman.
Wee cunt arent ye?
It’s just the component for most law spells is cash money.
let me get this straight, son… you won’t stand up and support your kids, but in your mutton head the lady behind the desk is the one hiding…
Good point, I hadn’t considered that element of it. Whatever else they think they may be doing there’s a group of people who are proudly showing off that they’re trying to avoid supporting their children and creating undeniable evidence of that fact. Bet their kids will be so proud of them in the future.
Good job trying to cut off your kids, asshole. They’re better off without a cheap, callous moron like you around.
Thank you! We’re all so focused on this dude being a complete nutjob that we’re missing the fact that he’s trying to fuck his kids over.
This was a guy? With all the emojis my brain thought this was a woman posting.
I couldn’t tell, so I kept my comment gender neutral
I really love how all these nut jobs think they just have to use some special words to trigger the magic loophole. They always seem so surprised when the people in charge say there isn’t one.
See the thing about the law, is that it’s mostly saying the right magic words. A lot of people don’t get that.
It’s called an attorney. An attorney says the right words.
Can we just force these people into mental health treatment? They shouldn’t be allowed untreated around anyone
People this stupid need education, not straitjackets.
The straitjackets are the only thing that’ll get them to sit still for the education!
I don’t think that’s how straightjackets or education work
Well they have already been educated, that’s why they go off like this, they think they’re smart.
But they’ve been typically taught by others of their ilk, so you’d have to educate them again in the correct manner. They have to be re-educated, with all its worrying connotations.
At this point I think it’s less morally ambiguous to just bludgeon them to death with a baseball bat. Call it evolution, survival of the least annoying.
At some point I start to feel that making fun of people like this is like making fun of the handicap.
Sure, this person is almost certainly a violent white supremacist. But read that sloppy excuse for a thought. You can’t believe something that obviously stupid without being in need of some serious support.
This person is actually black. Moorish sovcits often are. Many of them are white supremacists though.
I’m making a deliberate effort not to think about the logic of a black person being a white supremacist. My head will implode.
In the UK we call it the racist taxi driver phenomenon. A lot of taxi drivers in the UK are Muslim, and came over to the UK in the 70s and 80s. Now they are dead against immigration and want to pull the ladder up after themselves. Also when you get in the taxi they tell you all about this.
They rationalise it in their heads as, it’s not racism, it’s just prudent immigration policy.
South Africa has the same problem, racist Africans been racist about people of their own ethnicity. I’m sure there’s some deep and meaningful cultural difference between the two groups, but you’d have to be African to know about it.
A lot of sovcits are black, which probably has to due with generations of distrust of the government, but it’s still wacky as hell
