Is this some ‘sovereign citizen’ stuff?

Is this some ‘sovereign citizen’ stuff?

That’s a question often asked of me.

No, it’s not related to the smear of state nationals by the federal administration.

No, it’s not implying that people are can do anything they want. People still must follow the common law and the (original) state constitutions.

People need to honor contracts. People cannot harm thy neighbor. People can’t disturb the peace. People cannot trespass.

But people can put whatever they want in their mouths.

People don’t need to pay an annual fee to live on their land. There are other ways to tax inhabitants of a city or county.

People don’t need to pay taxes on activity unrelated to the federal government.

This isn’t related to the moors or people dressed in dungeon and dragons outfits, but those people may have some points right.

It’s worth noting that when the federal administration condemns the ‘sovereign citizen’ movement, this does apply to the inhabitants of United States territories, such as people living in District of Columbia or Puerto Rico. Those people are not sovereign. They have been conquered by the USofA alliance. Any talk by them of being sovereign would be a precarious claim. They could follow in the footsteps of the 1700s colonists who won a revolutionary war, as did the Dutch and the French. They could win their natural un-alienable rights. I leave them up to them.

But me is not a Puerto Rican. Me is a state national of one of the 50 states. The king, who was the sovereign, is long gone, and that power, that sovereignty flowed to the people. And stopped there. With them. With me. Sovereignty did not flow on to the state administration (aka government) or the federal/alliance administration (aka government).

The newly sovereign people of the late 1700s delegated tasks to their state administrators and the federal/alliance administrators. They didn’t make the administrators sovereign.

Me is state national of one of the 50 states. Is me a ‘sovereign citizen’? Me is sovereign like every other American. Me is state national. Me may be a ‘citizen’ of my state. But me does not see the value of using the phrase ‘sovereign citizen’.

Me is state national and me has un-a-lien-able rights. That about covers it.

States and Federal administration

The 50 states and the federal government can be sovereign in their own rights. A state is sovereign and can manage its affairs but it’s not over state nationals who created the state. That’s illogical. A man does not create a company only for the company president to then claim more rights than the owner.

The federal government also has sovereignty over the land assigned to it by the people (the state nationals). But the federal govt/administration does not have sovereignty over the state nationals. That’s illogical. Absurb. Obtuse. ROTFL

But the federal/alliance adminstration/govt does have sovereignty over the people living in the territories. And the federal government, through it’s K-12 schools and the media has convinced most state nationals that they are instead federal citizens and therefore stand-under the federal government. Don’t fall for it!