How do I unregister my car?

[mightymouse_69]

Harm is hurting a human being.

 

So what is hurting? Can one be hurt financially? Emotionally? Or only physically?

Can society at large be harmed?

 

You still have not really answered my other question. The cult you support seems to suggest that it is only the common law that applies to people. This, to anyone with a basic knowledge of the English Legal system, is a flawed argument.

 

Mainly because of what I said above. The common law follows parliament.

 

Tell me - under your system, how are new laws created?

[Conniff]

 

Icke's world

[locutus]

My 1 and only post before unregistering from this thread...

 

[peace2k]

financial hurt is loss. emotional hurt is subjective. something that hurts you may not hurt me.

society is harmed mainly by corporations.

 

common law applies to all people. legislation (acts, statutes, byelaws) only have force of law (on humans and non-members of the law society) with consent of the governed.

the legal system with barristers and judges on £100s per hour have little interest in doing themselves out of a lot of business. if it were just corporations and members of the law society that were affected then they'd loose half their business.

 

god made man with unalienable rights, man made corporations. the rights of a corporation can never trump the rights of a man.

 

do we really need new laws? why are people so obsessed with rules? i dont need rules to tell me not to cause harm, loss or injury to people.

Edited June 25, 2010 by peace2k
correction

[peace2k]

a policeman is a policyman. police enforce government policy. peace constable is their primary role, ask one.

Edited June 25, 2010 by peace2k
addition

[mightymouse_69]

financial hurt is loss. emotional hurt is subjective. something that hurts you may not hurt me.

society is harmed mainly by corporations.

 

common law applies to all people. legislation (acts, statutes, byelaws) only have force of law (on humans and non-members of the law society) with consent of the governed.

the legal system with barristers and judges on £100s per hour have little interest in doing themselves out of a lot of business. if it were just corporation and members of the law society that were affected then they'd loose half their business.

 

god made man with unalienable rights, man made corporations. the rights of a corporation can never trump the rights of a man.

 

do we really need new laws? why are people so obsessed with rules? i dont need rules to tell me not to cause harm, loss or injury to people.

 

Yes we need new laws - society and technology change at an alarming rate. Laws need to develop with these changes. So come on, how do we make new laws?

 

So is causing loss harm? Is it ok to cause loss? I take it that you have paid tax and you have car insurance, you wear your seatbelt at all times, you do not drink and drive or speed?

 

And also - I can assure you that not all barristers are on £100s. Especially those not involved in chancery.

 

You still don't understand about common law btw.

[mightymouse_69]

a policeman is a policyman. peace constable is their primary role, ask one.

 

Ok.

 

Earlier you said:

 

this is a common law jurisdiction, ask an policyman.

 

Police officers are not qualified to give legal advise, and often their grasp of the law differs to reality.

[Bookworm]

Any system which sets itself as credible and starts with "god made man" exposes itself to lack of credibility straight off. Maybe if we'd started with that, we wouldn't be on page 10 of this thread by now, I certainly wouldn't have bothered even trying to look into it.

[mightymouse_69]

Any system which sets itself as credible and starts with "god made man" exposes itself to lack of credibility straight off. Maybe if we'd started with that, we wouldn't be on page 10 of this thread by now, I certainly wouldn't have bothered even tried to look into it.

 

Did I read somewhere that one of the founders of this group claims to be a son of god?

 

Something along those lines anyway.

 

I know I probably am feeding the troll. But its a funny debate and is rather fun showing this cult up for what it is.

[Bookworm]

I think you're thinking of David Icke, he's the one who called himself son of god. There's also something about reptilians watching us, but I usually get scared at that point in the story.

 

I don't think he is one of the founders (could be wrong), but there certainly are close relations between the two cul... groups.

[mightymouse_69]

I see.

 

All rather interesting. Scary that some think its true!!

[peace2k]

i dont drive. i do jump red lights on my bike though.

 

god can mean anything you like. something outside of man. source energy? everything is energy afterall.

 

the law is always talking about god. you can swear in on a bible.

 

icke has taken his own sweet time to jump on the bandwagon.

 

constables are trained in common law.

[mightymouse_69]

constables are trained in common law.

 

They are?

 

i dont drive. i do jump red lights on my bike though.

 

So, you jump a red light and hit a pedestrian... you have caused harm?

You jump a red light and hit a car damaging it... you have caused harm?

[peace2k]

as i say, ask any constable about his common law training.

 

highly unlikely i'm going to hit anything because i do so with due care and attention. police often ignore me as i do so safely. i dont just shoot across, i treat it like any other crossing with no lights. are you seriously suggesting that i should wait at a red when there's nothing coming?

Edited June 25, 2010 by peace2k
addition

[mightymouse_69]

highly unlikely i'm going to hit anything because i do so with due care and attention. police often ignore me as i do so safely. i dont just shoot across, i treat it like any other crossing with no lights. are you seriously suggesting that i should wait at a red when there's nothing coming?

 

Well cars have to. Why shouldn't you? You said earlier that equality is very important.

 

If you did drive - you would of course abide by the rules of the road? No speeding, no drinking, insurance etc?

[mightymouse_69]

as i say, ask any constable about his common law training.

 

I have. I will quote him:

 

"You what?!"

[peace2k]

cars are different. i dont have a license or registration. i've made no contract.

 

cars kill 3000+ and injure 300,000+ per year. bikes kill 2 people per year when ridden crazily.

 

if i drove i'd drive very sensibly as i see them as potential killing machines. maybe instead of an air bag there should be a spike. cars are so safe for occupants now that it makes people careless. its been known for years that the bumper of most cars is at a height which causes a lot of damage to pedestrians.

 

i saw a lady with visibly bald tyres and told her. she laughed and said she knew and was going to get them done.

[peace2k]

are you sure he was a constable? not a pcso? in london they seem fairly aware of it.

[mightymouse_69]

You have not answered my question and insurance and driving to the rules of the road.

[mightymouse_69]

are you sure he was a constable? not a pcso? in london they seem fairly aware of it.

 

He is a constable.

[peace2k]

i abide by my own rules, nobody elses. from what i've seen, a lot of drivers seem to be of the same opinion. although their rules appear less caring.

 

what harm is caused when drivers speed up towards me as i cross in front of them? that's assault if i could prove it. what harm is caused when someone illegally uses the incredibly loud horn in their sound proofed car to protest something i've done or when we ride side by side, as per the highway code.

[mightymouse_69]

Ok you have still failed to answer my questions properly.

 

I'm going to leave this discussion now. Its been interesting to talk to you.

 

I can only say that i find it amazing that anybody can believe what is really a load of tosh.

 

Good luck to you anyway.

[peace2k]

regards your constable, ignorance of the law is no excuse.

[mightymouse_69]

regards your constable, ignorance of the law is no excuse.

 

You remember that when your up in court charged contrary to a statutory offence, my friend.

[gwc1000]

legislation only has force of law with consent of the governed.

You have been listening to the likes of that idiot John Harris too much.

You believe that you may withdraw your individual consent to statute law?

If that is the case I challenge you to prove it.

Are you willing to accept the challenge?