Win on Click-it or Ticket
One of the nice aspects of Ed Rivera’s teachings is “knowing the organics means never having to use the same approach twice.” Let’s explore what I call “the negotiation approach” with my latest encounter.
So I’m on a nice vacation in North Carolina 600 miles from home on a remote sand-spit of an island. It’s about a 6 mile long island. I had just settled-in and decided I needed some supplies from the store just down the road. Who puts on a seat belt to travel 2 miles on a road with a 25mph speed limit? Not me. Ahhh…but I forgot its Labor day weekend. I pass a city police cruiser. No problem. I pass a sheriff cruiser. No problem. Certainly they can’t have more police! But alas hiding behind a parked truck was a State Trooper. He explained it was “Click it or ticket weekend” and I happened to win the lottery with a nice $161 ticket.
Student’s of Ed’s realize I beat one of these same tickets by the State of Ohio—totally using organic-law knowledge I learned from Ed. This time was different as I obviously wasn’t going to drive back 600 miles to attend court and would have to rely upon paperwork alone. So let’s try a different approach.
So the next day, ticket in hand, I head to the court building to search out the district attorney. Naturally the woman behind the glass window to the DA’s office says “You have to come in tomorrow. Maybe they’ll see you.” Undeterred I tried another approach. I spot a fellow in a nice suit approaching and tried this line: “They told me there’s a sharp attorney that works here in the DA’s office—is that you?” [What’s he going to say? If he says “no”, he admits to not being very sharp…] The first guy said he was a public defender. Ahh…but here’s how the conversation went with the 2nd guy:
Him: “I work in the DA’s office.”
Me: “Well…maybe you’re that sharp attorney they told me about.”
Him: “How can I help you?”
Me: “I was on vacation and a trooper gave me this lottery ticket for “click it or stick-it weekend”.
Him: “Ahh a seat belt violation. It’s $161. Do you want to pay it now?”
Me: “It hardly arises to a ‘health-and-public-safety’ issue burden; I typically challenge even further organics in law then that– in paperwork I submit…so I’m down here to avoid all that un-necessary expense on your behalf. Maybe we can just dismiss the whole matter. Besides, I had helped one of your citizens get her van out of the sand.”
Him: “So you actually helped out one of our own and we gave you a ticket?”
Me: “In a manner of speaking, yes.”
Him: “I can’t dismiss the whole matter—you’d have to submit paperwork and take your chances with the court and maybe have to appear yourself to explain.”
Me: “I understand—I like a good challenge…”
Him: “But…to save everyone’s time….How about $10…total? I’ll change it to a “back seatbelt violation”.
Me: “Done”
Discussion:
Clearly this isn’t a total win because the astute student would notice it admits to a territorial jurisdiction. Frankly IF I submitted the appropriate challenges I learned from Ed’s teachings, I most likely could have avoided not only the $10 but also my admission. However considering it was 600 miles from home and considering I wouldn’t physically attend that court and have to rely solely upon the paperwork, $10 seemed not a bad compromise.
Why did I use the phrase “health and public safety issue burden”?
Answer: Student’s of Ed’s are taught how the state’s exercise powers in reality. We can always challenge this and place the burden of proof on the distract attorney. [Actually the cop first, DA second and court 3rd]. If I had done so, I think I could have avoided even the $10 and the admission. However lawyer’s are taught someplace in law school that all the powers state’s claim over citizens arises from some state constitutional aspect of “health and public safety”. Why not “parrot” words familiar to him and inform him I’m aware also? Always remember that lawyers follow the George Washington plot of fulfillment “that everything begins with the constitution”. He also obviously knew that I knew a burden of proof was upon him to basically prove: “How did this violation ARISE to the level of a health and public safety issue when it’s a 25mph speed limit, when I had insurance…etc…etc…etc.” So you can tell the mindset of this attorney: “Well…this isn’t the average customer to be fleeced. Do I want to waste time with this guy? Let’s make him go away the easiest way I can.”
Would you want to know how a seat-belt violation is considered to arise to a health and public safety issue standard? If you’re thinking “Hey…there’s no injured party except for the “self”…so no victim. You’re correct! From what I recall, it was argued that without a seat belt the driver could become injured. That meant to federal government MIGHT have to pay for some kind of disability. And that…according to what I recall…was how they justified “seat belt laws”. If you’re a close student of Ed’s you’ll realize the charade to hide the true nature of the power they exercise—which is a proprietary power over s snippet of territory they own, the general ignorance of the population to so, and of course those who volunteer to be citizens of the territorial government. Sometimes you can “play to the charade”…
Dave
Ed’s Law School Well Worth the Tuition
Recently I had the opportunity to meet several members of the usurpation-squad under the “authority” of their papers of coercion and extortion. It can be quite intimidating undergoing such coercion for such things as the victimless matters of traffic ‘violations’, marijuana smoking, taxation, civil credit card debt collection, summons, foreclosure, etc.
The lawyers and government do these intimidation things on a routine basis having years of time and many victims under their belt to perfect the paperwork– and perfect the words in marketing to you that you are an absolute subject to their every whim. They use every tactic in an attempt to get you to volunteer to their authority.
But by using the material in Ed’s school on the Organic Laws of the United States of America, you can very effectively restrict their authority in originating power to the territory of ownership of the United States of America called the United States. How can you tell it works? In my case it was a TOTAL change in attitude once one peered back behind the curtain in law. They did the BARE minimum just to say they did their job and to desperately keep up the curtain on the Wizard of Oz.
Why does this work and what are the advantages:
- Number one, it’s the TRUTH. Never forget that 3% of the population in the revolution, armed with the simple truth of Paine, Magna Carta, God’s unwritten law, etc.., overcame the most powerful nation on earth.
- It’s in their written LAW. This is a BIG advantage over the patriots just prior to 1776.
- It defines what your adversaries are, their power, their authority and as such–because it came essentially before them in creation–it is very hard for them to label your claim-to-same as say frivolous.
- The opposing counsel is well versed typically on state and federal code and such silliness as rules of court and evidence and court cases. That makes it a trap. Those things your adversary will expect because NO LAWYER we are aware of, will use Organic Laws because ignorantly he feels his bar privilege would be revoked. This completely upsets the apple-cart—by becoming a student and learning this law, you will have the upper hand and your adversary will be left scrambling.
- You rarely have to deal much in the intentionally misleading things such as UCC, State Revised Code or the drudgery of all those non-positive-law Title codes.
- It’s a literal SKELETON KEY—the MASTER KEY to unlock everything. It has to be this KEY because it’s the ORIGIN. To deny the key is to deny access to everything that came later.
- Lawyers rarely “read the law”. What they read are other opinions of the law and quickly claim them as nearly their own. [These are all those case cites you see in pleadings.] They will be left HELPLESS on this topic. Most don’t have the time to read what you learned—so imagine the frustration. In fact, isn’t it poetic justice for THEY knew you were at a disadvantage to their law when they gave you XX days to respond.
- Most importantly, it allows you to show them in their own laws:
- The origin of your power
- The origin of their power
- The territory over which they can exercise that power.
- Just like the Visa advertisement, you TOO can have a Visa to more freedom:
- Cost of Ed’s School: Peanuts—made affordable in service to mankind–in truth, law, justice and freedom.
- Value in seeing a COCKY lawyer squirm: Well worth the admission.
- Value in the truth will set you free: Unbelievably PRICELESS.
Free Inhabitant Thomas Paine