Current Events > What's the argument with sovereign citizens? They're they're own country?

(+) Yeah! (+)

They have the right to travel

Their arguments make zero sense because they are formed with zero basis in reality.

It feels like some of it are people who just want to gum up the works as much as possible for their own cases, and some people who have genuinely fallen for the grift. (People selling sovereign citizen 'guides' and fake licenses online and shit)

I do enjoy watching some sovereign citizen court cases on YouTube though, they get legally smacked so hard every time lol.

They're dumb, all there is too it.

Error1355 posted...

Their arguments make zero sense because they are formed with zero basis in reality.

This it's the same as anti-vaxxers. They essentially made something up and think it holds water because they found some other crazy person who confirms it.

The idea is that they don't consider themselves citizens of the US and are not subjected to the laws of the country. Of course this is only done selectively and they suddenly care about their rights when they start getting arrested.

They don't tend to be very bright or reasonably well-adjusted people

But the older I get, the more I respect the desire to check out of society. And isn't it fucking weird how we're born into a country and bound by its laws without any consent on our part? The social contract, etc.

Tmaster148 posted...

Of course this is only done selectively and they suddenly care about their rights when they start getting arrested.

Yeah, it's always someone using our roads, electricity, water and stuff. It's never some dude living in the woods who doesn't take from the government for anything. I would at least respect that.

Error1355 posted...

It feels like some of it are people who just want to gum up the works as much as possible

Reminds me of a bunch of users of a certain message board on a certain site

Legal Eagle had a good video on legal myths a few weeks ago that had a section on sovereign citizens:

https://youtu.be/dE4Oa3hcq24?si=v88I9UoUms8i6bQo&t=595

(skip to 9:55 if the timestamp doesn't work)

pinky0926 posted...

But the older I get, the more I respect the desire to check out of society. And isn't it fucking weird how we're born into a country and bound by its laws without any consent on our part? The social contract, etc.

You're going to be telling cops you're "traveling" within a few months, aren't you

pinky0926 posted...

They don't tend to be very bright or reasonably well-adjusted people

But the older I get, the more I respect the desire to check out of society. And isn't it fucking weird how we're born into a country and bound by its laws without any consent on our part? The social contract, etc.

The alternative would be only applying laws to people if they like it, which isnt a great system.

But there should be more freedom of movement so that people can more easily live elsewhere if they choose.

Worth pointing out that this contention with society's implicit consent to law didn't originate with weird rednecks, but is maybe one of the oldest formalised philosophical concepts on record.

If you had all the power in the world, would you continue to abide by laws that were only ratified through force of arms? I wouldn't.

They want all benefits of citizenship with none of the responsibility.

They are very stupid, is the thing.

pinky0926 posted...

Worth pointing out that this contention with society's implicit consent to law didn't originate with weird rednecks, but is maybe one of the oldest formalised philosophical concepts on record.

If you had all the power in the world, would you continue to abide by laws that were only ratified through force of arms? I wouldn't.

Where are you getting that from? Because Im not familiar with any version of it that even comes close to things like Parmenides and his denial of movement or Heraclitus and his theory of flux.

THERE IS NO ARGUMENT!!!!!!

They are a mix of dog shit dumb people who are always wrong mixed with annoying people shouting about "My rights!!!"

There is a document, I don't where it originated from, and I could not find a primary source for it, when I saw it, it was a photocopy uploaded to a website (and I can't find it right now).

But when you do find it, you can tell, Sovereign Citizens don't believe what they're saying, just somehow they were convinced claiming Sovereign Citizenship was a loophole in the criminal justice system.

If you have this document, you can go to any of the YouTube videos on SovCits and read along. It's a list of "if the judge says X, then you claim Y, if they say A, then you claim B. You can literal predict with 100% accuracy what the SovCit idiot will say, because they're just reading from a script. It's funny for a while....

But then you realize, the Judge (and prosecutor and defense lawyer) are required to take this person seriously. And while watching them is funny, it's also costing tax payers money.

I'm just saying, Donald Trump wants mass deportation and we have a ton of people who are actually claiming they aren't US citizens.

I'm not driving, I'm traveling

Glob posted...

Where are you getting that from? Because Im not familiar with any version of it that even comes close to things like Parmenides and his denial of movement or Heraclitus and his theory of flux.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_contract#History

Social contract formulations are preserved in many of the world's oldest records.[6] The Indian Buddhist text of the second century BC Mahvastu recounts the legend of Mahasammata. The story goes as follows:

In the early days of the cosmic cycle mankind lived on an immaterial plane, dancing on air in a sort of fairyland, where there was no need of food or clothing, and no private property, family, government or laws. Then gradually the process of cosmic decay began its work, and mankind became earthbound, and felt the need of food and shelter. As men lost their primeval glory, distinctions of class arose, and they entered into agreements with one another, accepting the institution of private property and the family. With this theft, murder, adultery, and other crime began, and so the people met together and decided to appoint one man from among them to maintain order in return for a share of the produce of their fields and herds. He was called "the Great Chosen One" (Mahasammata), and he received the title of raja because he pleased the people.[7]
In his rock edicts, the Indian Buddhist king Asoka was said to have argued for a broad and far-reaching social contract.[citation needed] The Buddhist vinaya also reflects social contracts expected of the monks; one such instance is when the people of a certain town complained about monks felling saka trees, the Buddha tells his monks that they must stop and give way to social norms.[citation needed]

I think we're seeing somebody become a sovereign citizen right in this topic.

HashtagSEP posted...

I think we're seeing somebody become a sovereign citizen right in this topic.

For clarification, if I was a multi billionaire I would absolutely be a sovereign citizen

But unfortunately I'm not, which means that if I want to have a decent quality of life I am beholden to laws and social rules. So I pay my taxes, I follow the speed limit, I comply with officers etc.

But without a doubt, half the laws we have are things I would happily break and ignore if I had the money and power to do so.

pinky0926 posted...

But without a doubt, half the laws we have are things I would happily break and ignore if I had the money and power to do so.

Like what, out of curiosity?

HashtagSEP posted...

Like what, out of curiosity?

IDK about him but I would totally commit millions worth of insurance fraud if I thought I could get away with it lol.

HashtagSEP posted...

Like what, out of curiosity?

We spend so much of our time and money just paying people who are disgustingly wealthy because it's the law to. I have to have insurance. I have to have physical ID. I have to pay taxes that go to a royal family who owns stuff for no reason. I have to pay parking tickets to private mafias that run parking zones.

I'd quite like to be on an island somewhere, ignoring all of these things. Doing a bunch of fun drugs and kind of just living free.

I've seen a good share of Internet people do similar things a sovereign citizen would do but online.

They think they're ultra smart wordsmiths that tries to contextually and conveniently use different terms to build a safe narrative for themselves.

Something something Entity Known As something something

hmnut7 posted...

There is a document, I don't where it originated from, and I could not find a primary source for it, when I saw it, it was a photocopy uploaded to a website (and I can't find it right now).

Maybe from what's mentioned in LE's video: a Philadelphia printer accidentally included a proposed but not ratified amendment in one of their published legal works.

Bit more of a mundane answer, but yeah, as a couple here have mentioned, they don't completely believe in all the crap they're saying (and hilariously is a catch-22 on their part if they start screaming about "their rights" despite trying to claim that the laws don't apply to them).

But the sovereign citizen 'argument' is just a ruse to mess with the court system in an attempt to get out of whatever trouble that person is in, no matter how miniscule.
It's definitely a waste of time and I think by now most law enforcement and courts around the country a little more prepared to deal with people attempting it (immediate escalation of consequences until they knock it off and just cooperate and be on their way).