Just met my first one – what fun they are 😀 . Thankfully this one had at least remembered to insure his car and obtain a driving licence, so we didn’t have to do anything to get us on YouTube. It was interesting to note that although they are not bound by the law in any way, they do recognise the authority of the battleaxe sitting next to them when they are scolded like a naughty boy and told to ‘stop being an arse and show them your driving licence’. And they go a funny purpley colour when you say ‘Magna Carta? That’s not even a real thing mate’. If you can find one I heartily recommend them for a bit of sport.

Met in an official capacity?

Yeah, to a degree.

Surprising amount of these about:

[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAQNweGsKqM[/video]

For an easy life ehh 😆

Yes dear… 😉

There must be a couple in here.

They are AMAZING.

Mind, a properly serious flat-earther popped up on Imgur yesterday. A lot of what he was saying was very sensible, if you approached it with a genuinely open mind. There isn’t a South Pole, for example. What you think of as the continent of Antarctica is in fact a wall of ice preventing you falling off the world. No-one has ever crossed it. Once you realise that you’ve been duped by freemasonry and astronomers all your life and everything you know is obviously incorrect it’s remarkable what you can find out on the internet.

🙂

This dude seems to be reasonably convinced that the Large Hadron Collider’s purpose is to break the ceiling over the top of the Earth. He has admittedly deduced this from the London Olympics opening ceremony, but as this featured Stephen Hawking (who is in fact a puppet, presumably controlled by jooze) it seems pretty likely.

There isn’t a South Pole, for example. What you think of as the continent of Antarctica is in fact a wall of ice preventing you falling off the world. No-one has ever crossed it.

That explains why we don’t go the southern way from Oz to the US. Did he tell you where the other edges were? Must be near the sea monster bit…

I think the ice wall goes all the way round the world. The North Pole is in the middle of the world, that’s OK, but there is then an ice wall around the outside.

Don’t know about the sea monsters. Some of them are convinced that dragons were real (Marco Polo saw one). You’d think there would be a few sea monsters though.

Fremen-on-the…erm…sticky-out-bit-of-the-land

How my heart skipped with excitement when I saw the thread title only to be crushed by disappointment when I saw who the author was no actual frothing nonsense to follow. There is a very interesting debate to have about the source of law and legal authority but the freemen miss it and end up with a moral cowards anarchy trying to create a lawful reason why the law does not apply to them . I have come across a number plus read around the idea a load yet to see any one of them present an argument that stands up to scrutiny. I have seen one succeed in court but not for the reasons he thought.

Sooooo….

Cheeky trails. Do we just proclaim ourselves ‘Freemen on the Land’ whilst tearing up the trails through the nearest country estate?

Freemen On The Land

Must admit I’d never even heard of them until I saw this thread. So I just read the Wiki page for a quick bit of knowledge and it seems to me it’s just an excuse to break the law and do what you like.

Crankboy – are you talking about issues like statute law being a codification of the common law, and whether one overrules the other? I would agree, fascinating, and throw in whether the principles in the great charters were merely confirmation of this, and as such inviolable, and adding the statutes of Westminster and bill of rights we open the question of whether a parliament can indeed bind its successors? Lovely stuff! And as you say, far more interesting than all the maritime/corporate law bollocks 🙂

proud to walk (well limp really) and cycle this land OF OURS causing no harm injury or loss, also not bowing down to ‘perceived authority’ for something we were ALL supposedly born Equal on.
place would be better if more were like this IMO of course 🙂
oh, Lawful and Legal are two completely different things, just thought I would clear that one up 😉

Know a few. They’re just people, very odd that.

Rozztafarianism is as daft as any other religion really 🙂

yep and pair brace double and two are totally different concepts. Just like legal and lawful.

yep and pair brace double and two are totally different concepts.

That’s line dancing, isn’t it?

Anyway, I’d also not heard of this concept until this thread. Though we’ve got much more right to roam up here, maybe it’s less of a thing. It’s a bit like preppers in the States.

ninfan in part yes but also the philosophical side of the origins of law which is where English Freemen seem to try to start . So really common law as inherently existing or the King being the fount of all justice or law comes from God , the royal fount of all justice being a derivation of Gods law or does law originally come from whose got the biggest stick and most mates . All nicely academic and ultimately futile.

Pair brace double and two, Cuthbert dibble and grub

There’s an interesting debate to be had about common law and statute. I agree with Ninfan there. (and Crankboy) @Lawmanmx

proud to walk (well limp really) and cycle this land OF OURS causing no harm injury or loss,

I’d agree with that as well but many of those who call themselves freemen seem to be using it to avoid paying for things they should be paying for like car insurance or not to comply with very reasonable requests from police trying to find out who committed a crime.

I’d never come across this Freemen idea before but a quick Google later…

Philosophical and historical constitutional arguments aside the freeman are missing the point that, in the UK, judges decide how law is applied within a framework set by government. Even if ancient precedent and s lay interpretation of common law suggests one thing then if the judge says no, then the answer is no. If the judge says yes then the Government can introduce new statute to make that answer no.

But on a more fundamental level, those in charge decide what is or is not deemed legal and any amount of legalistic argument isn’t going to get around that basic point

True Gordimhor

But then you get the odd nutter like that stands his ground on a weird issue like where can you park a canal boat, and ends up winning 😀

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2013/73.html

Never heard of them until this, Just watched a fascinating you tube with a chap growing weed and trying to justify himself by using quasi legal mumbo jumbo to place himself outside the law…using legal arguments to defeat a law that he doesn’t want to recognise! Does the contradiction not drive them nuts?

bizarre

I would like to retract the first word in my earlier post, proud isn’t really what I feel about this or much else for that matter, Im just happy to Be 🙂

I think it’s the whole ‘those in charge’ bit that grates with some people..

It’s a pretty amusing concept innit?
Pompous **** assuming superiority and all that.. Who are they trying to kid!? 😆

Is this even a real thing? It’s not some elaborate , time shifted April Fool gag?

If it is real then I’m going to start my own grassroots movement to rival these buffoons….

we shall be Disciples of the Monkey.

We shall be extremely funky and will be governed only by the words of law which may fall from the curiously androgynous lips of the boy-monk Tripitaka.

@greatape – let’s see you try and enforce your earthly laws upon me if you happen to pull me over in my flying cloud. 😀

I predict a similar level of success in my philosophy to that of these Freemen nuggets.

How my heart skipped with excitement when I saw the thread title only to be crushed by disappointment when I saw who the author was no actual frothing nonsense to follow

Apologies, I’ll see if I can muster up some drivel for my next thread 🙂

Rozztafarianism is as daft as any other religion really

Definitely, if not more so.

Despite my line of work, I’m very much in favour of close scrutiny of the power of the state vs the individual, so agree that there is probably quite an interesting discussion to be had on some of the issues that freemen allude to and the origins of state power. But that’s only going to work with the reasonable and articulate ones, of which I suspect there are plenty, but these are not the hard of thinking folk who have ended up inadvertently being the public face of the movement by foaming at the mouth on YouTube or starting a pantomime in the courtroom. The chap we met last night was managing to argue several contradictory points at the same time, although clearly didn’t grasp this, but in any case his wife soon took control of him, so we could do what we needed to do to catch a very bad man, and he could go home 🙂

Bring it on perchypanther, it doesn’t put me up or down. If you have done a bad thing I shall lock you up in my cells and have your cloud recovered and impounded by an approved contractor. If you haven’t I shall simply respond to your drivel with a withering look until you run out of steam, then sentence you to the same Gallic shrug and every other mouth breathing lunatic gets 😀

EDIT Although we might end up in a self-imploding paradox or something, as you would have to do what I demand since I AM THE LAW, yet at the same time in this scenario I would for obvious reasons be Pigsy And would have to do as you say. Tricky one.

Not sure you are that good at interpreting things Poddy

Under their theory, natural laws require only that individuals do not harm others, do not damage the property of others, and do not use “fraud or mischief” in contracts

I also agree with what Gretape said as well

Interestingly I used to dislike the police [ as a yoof] and the power of the state I then moved abroad and realised how wonderful ours were [ relatively nothing is perfect]
My worst experience was being “sold” drugs at gin point by a copper whilst wondering whether he would then arrest me for possession with a ris of some serious time in jail or a massive fine I could not afford.

Might try the freeman thing if i ever get stopped by a copper just for giggles 😉

I shall simply respond to your drivel with a withering look until you run out of steam, then sentence you to the same Gallic shrug and every other mouth breathing lunatic gets

Like this one? 😀

Pretty much, except my moustache is not as tidy.

I suppose that if a copper does stop them, and they start all that common law/maritime law rubbish, the police could always have a laugh demand to inspect their log book

Or arrest them them on suspicion of the unlawful discharge of seamen (that should perk the custody sergeants day up)

I’ve seen people posting stuff that sounded a bit like this on Facebook before – tends to be the conspiracy theorists and the wackier hippies/anarchists etc. I seem to remember some status being copied and pasted around where it was claimed that posting it freed you from the bounds of conventional criminal law. 🙂 It is quite interesting though.

Some of the American ‘sovereign citizen’ people are a bit scary though. Militia groups etc getting into armed standoffs with the federal government. I read somewhere that according to a survey of law enforcement officers they see these type of movements as the biggest threat to national security in the US, above Islamic terrorism. Strangely doesn’t quite get the same press.

being “sold” drugs at gin point

How very civilised 🙂

ninfan – I am obliged. Until now offences such as obstructing a salmon and stuff like that were my favourite obscure findings, but your discharge of seamen is hard to beat.

The logical answer is as you ain’t a freeman as intended in Magna Carter and in any event you cannot be in lawful rebellion you are out side the law and a self declared traitor to our lawful Queen it is there for my duty as a loyal subject to kill you .

your discharge of seamen is hard to beat.

😯

Get a room, funboys.