Quote:
Originally Posted by Hack&Lube
Some lazy news articles have made mention that Freemen have a better grasp of law than lawyers.
|
Uhhh which news organizations are these?
The way I interpret the Freemen and similar groups is that they're an extreme example of how many lay people look at law. They see it as mystical and mysterious because they don't quite understand the nuances of how it works. It always amazes me to hear people talk about contracts and when a contract is "legal" (they mean enforceable) and say something like "did you sign anything? Then it's not legal", as if a pen is some sort of sorcerer's wand that can imbue a piece of paper with magical legal powers.
The Freemen seem to take the view that the legal system is just sort of a whole system of words and concepts that lawyers and judges have gotten together and decided should mean X, Y or Z, totally arbitrarily. That's arguably sort of true, given that all common law stems from someone just deciding that that's what the law should be, whether it's parliament or some delegated authority or a judge in England in 1819. So they've just decided no, we're going to create new words and concepts and act as though THEY have special meaning just because we say so, and our manufactured legal concepts are no less valid than yours, because they're both just arbitrary invented structures. By declaring certain words to be legal, I can somehow make those words magic and "appoint you as a trustee fiduciary liable" or some similar thing.