Laws and Statutes - The Rule Of Law In The UK

Sorry if this is in the wrong forum, please move if needed.

To my UK friends, please give this webpage a read when you've got time, and come back with your views on the subject matter.

Here is an excerpt from the page, giving the tiniest bit of information that I didn't know. The page is studded with many many many bullet points giving information that 99% of us don't know concerning the difference between Laws and Statutes. It is a real eye-opener for those who don't know much about their rights when it comes to "legislation."

Governments do not make, nor can they change laws. They make and change legislation. Governments are not above the law (they clearly think they are) – but they can and do make themselves exempt from (i.e. they are above) the provisions of statutes. It is probable that because they know they are above statutes (which they are – they make them) that they have come to assume they are also above the law This demonstrates how important it is to know the difference.

For those who can't/won't read, or to those who it isn't applicaple, it basically states that in the UK (not sure if US has Statutes), there are obviously Laws which MUST be lived by. However, when it comes to Statutes (legislation/rules/regulations that Government create and pass), we do not HAVE to live by them. We cannot withdraw our consent, but we can most definitely refuse to obey statutes, simply by withdrawing your consent to live by them, if you find that they impeach your rights (or if you wish not to be Governed).

When we hear things like "You have broken the law by parking on double yellow lines" or are questioned due to parking in a disabled parking space, you are being lied to. You have broken a statute, not a law, and a statute is a rule that applies to groups of people, not entire countries (like disabled parking favours disabled people, or Government pension schemes favouring Government employees).

Eughh, i'm blabbering on. People should have a look at this, as it shows how politicians, even your Prime Minister, really has no power (well, by law they shouldn't, but like the article states, they throw around their definitions of Laws and Statues haphazardly, so as to confuse people into thinking the Government is above the Law).

An eye-opener, and hope to see feedback and thoughts on whether this is new to you or not.

EDIT: Forgot to add the source www.thebcgroup.org.uk...

reply to post by domasio


just marking for later

reply to post by domasio


You should also check out ....www.tpuc.org...

And maybe have a gander at this.....




Hope it helps

Peace

It is interesting to note that the last case of pressing was quite close to me (Horsham, Rape of Bramber, Sussex) and bares something in relation to these theories.

In 1735 John Weekes of Fittleworth was accused of the murder of Elizabeth Symonds near to Petworth, Sussex. Weekes declined to offer a plea, and so according to law the courts held no jurisdiction over him.

However, Weekes was instead found guilty of 'standing mute through malice' and was sentenced to pressing to persuade him to enter as a plea.

The courts could only try him if he entered a plea, and pressing was one of the methods used to entice/threaten and/or torture people into entering a plea, but in this case he remained mute, and so was pressed to death instead.

In taking this route his home, and what wealth he had was not forfeit to the crown which would have been the case if he entered a plea and was found guilty.

So although we might not have to abide by the rules they lay down and change all the time, they usually find a way of side stepping the laws to enforce their rules anyway.

rupert-taylor.suite101.com...

In the U.S we have a lawful way of removing oneself from statute laws since here they are considered private laws, for citizens only that volunteer to be subject to them. You can remove yourself from them by correcting your status placing you back into the Republic and its common laws.

I have many threads explaining this and educating the masses on the truth in law.
The main site in the U.S to start your education and correcting your status is: www.pacinlaw.org

Thank you.

Originally posted by ProRipp
reply to post by domasio

 

You should also check out ....www.tpuc.org...

And maybe have a gander at this.....

Hope it helps

Peace

edit on 063131p://01America/Chicago12 by ProRipp because: (no reason given)

That video put it into perspective much better than my own source did. That man won't be heard by enough people unfortunately. He is a hero if he manages to spread the word enough.

To think that the country you live in, isn't actually a country, but a registered corporation/company/business and that your "Courts of Law" and your "Prime Minister" are also registered as corporations/companies/businesses is absolutely disgusting, and I fear for the world today.

I know that lots of ATSers refuse to have Facebook accounts, but I keep mine active for the specific purpose of spreading these kind of things to people that DON'T come onto websites like this, or that aren't aware of them. My family and friends, ALL of them, don't know the way the world and their country (or should I say their "employers") runs things, and I use my Facebook to let them know, because if we don't let our own family and friends know, and just random people who are a small fraction of what we really need, then nothing will ever be done to free us from our owners.

reply to post by domasio


Thanks, I'm glad you took the time to watch the video.
It goes much deeper than even this and I hope you get a real understanding in your
research as to how this world has gotten so corrupt and unjust !
Many many people don't know the difference between Lawful and Legal, and thats a great shame !


Peace

Originally posted by ProRipp
reply to post by domasio

 

Thanks, I'm glad you took the time to watch the video.
It goes much deeper than even this and I hope you get a real understanding in your
research as to how this world has gotten so corrupt and unjust !
Many many people don't know the difference between Lawful and Legal, and thats a great shame !


Peace

Exactly, and thank you so much for taking the time to post it!! I shall star you as soon as I post this

It actually makes me want to cry with frustration. An hour ago when I first started watching, I was one of the majority who thought "How can we survive or stop such a complicated system?" Turns out, it is actually extremely simple, and like the guy says, it's all about the language they use to confuse you into thinking there is nothing you can do about any of it.

reply to post by domasio


As I said before it goes even deeper




Watch all four parts ?


Peace

Originally posted by ProRipp
reply to post by domasio

 

As I said before it goes even deeper

Watch all four parts ?


Peace

I'm watching them right away. The only thing is, I went on to the TPUC website, and let's say I were to withdraw my consent to be Governed, or if I were to withdraw my consent to be held lawfully responsible for Statutes, then who would Govern me, and wouldn't I die pretty quickly, since I do not own any land to grow food on, and wouldn't be able to trade with companies as I would not have "Statutory Rights" as it were?

reply to post by domasio

You can agree or disagree to anything you wish that is your right as a FREE man !
It takes alot of research and understanding to really grasp what being free really is, even I haven't got
all the answers yet, and I've been trying to live as a FREE man for quite a few years now !
At least I hope I have helped you on your way and you can live as you want to in future, as I do now !


Peace

reply to post by domasio


Looks like someone went to a lot of trouble to produce a fancy looking website just to tell the world they don't understand what statute law means

I'm just wondering whether there is a law against publishing websites that containing false and misleading information that, if followed, could result in a person breaking the law? (he seems to be arguing that if it's a written law then you don't have to obey it!) Maybe when I have some free time I'll look through the statute books and see what I can find

Originally posted by Essan
reply to post by domasio

 

Looks like someone went to a lot of trouble to produce a fancy looking website just to tell the world they don't understand what statute law means

I'm just wondering whether there is a law against publishing websites that containing false and misleading information that, if followed, could result in a person breaking the law? (he seems to be arguing that if it's a written law then you don't have to obey it!) Maybe when I have some free time I'll look through the statute books and see what I can find

They are not written laws, they are statutes, and only contain the same power of law if the person to whom they apply gives their consent to the statute.

Deny ignorance ... okay then

Originally posted by domasio


They are not written laws, they are statutes, and only contain the same power of law if the person to whom they apply gives their consent to the statute.

This is part of the freeman argument. It's a total myth - as some of the census refusers now being prosecuted are finding out. Or let's put it this way. You can plead your rights till the cows come home and you will still be prosecuted.
rationalwiki.org...
PS I was a census refuser too but I knew better than to place my faith in the 'I don't have to take notice of statutes' argument.

reply to post by domasio

You should watch the second one ITS AN ILLUSION 2 its more complete and then have a look at John Harris @ the BCG conference.

Im sure you will enjoy.

Veronica chapman. this is her website FMOTL FORUM

This takes you to the most comprehensive playlist of veronicas presentation called.

The Grand Deception

Podcasts

veronica has made some very good observations and her website is a mine of good information.

Originally posted by starchild10

Originally posted by domasio


They are not written laws, they are statutes, and only contain the same power of law if the person to whom they apply gives their consent to the statute.

This is part of the freeman argument. It's a total myth - as some of the census refusers now being prosecuted are finding out. Or let's put it this way. You can plead your rights till the cows come home and you will still be prosecuted.
rationalwiki.org...
PS I was a census refuser too but I knew better than to place my faith in the 'I don't have to take notice of statutes' argument.

edit on 12-1-2012 by starchild10 because: (no reason given)

Technically, whether it be law or statute, the Government, the entire country, the Prime Minister and the Courts are all legally recognised businesses, and businesses have no lawful right to create legislation i'm afraid.

Even if they were, they would themselves be breaking the law, as they can only give their Statutes through consent of the Governed, and anybody CAN refuse to be Governed.

I didn't say that they wouldn't be able to push their prosecutions, of course they would, they couldn't give a tinky's ass whether they treat us "trade" fairly as long as they win the argument. People like yourself are total enablers of the tyranny that ruins our everyday lives. You can argue all day on whether Freeman's argument is correct or not, but you cannot deny that Governments that claim to be democratic are plainly NOT. Democracy is PURE freedom, any law or statute that restricts you in any way (such as the statute passed during the London's Fire in 1666 as I learned from one of the videos posted that legally declares you, me, and everybody born in the UK dead or missing unless you declare yourself alive, this one you cannot debunk, it's in the Magna Carta) is not promoting freedom, and the people have every right to disobey that Government (even though ours isn't a Government, it's a business trading people and "their" property).

Originally posted by domasio

They are not written laws, they are statutes, and only contain the same power of law if the person to whom they apply gives their consent to the statute.

Deny ignorance ... okay then

A statute is a written law. Or, put another way, a written law is known as a statute. That blog is simply wrong. Very wrong.

btw do people really belive that it's okay to sell alcohol to a child, because the law making it an offence to do so is written in the statute book and therefore you can choice whether or not you want to be bound by it?

And what about rape? Or child molestation? You really beleive you can do anything you want without punishment?

That you are above all the laws?

Why don't people do research before taking on what someone says as gospel?

Essan is right, a statute is a law. It is called a 'statute' to distinguish legislated law from case law. Legislation, statutory law, is law enacted by a government. Case law is decisions made by the courts. They are both laws.