Common Law knowledge is spreading...

[mikey_the_redneck]

Originally Posted by Clever_Iggy

Please find me the "article examples" that isn't from one of the Zeitgeist movies where this was successful in the US.

Oh I see. I will try and get it later.......it was a businessman (in Colorado I think) who decided not to pay income tax because there was no law that said you had to.......and he was successful.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by fredr123

Nice post, Captain. I was reading through the decision and noticed the url was the same as one that you posted.

Here's a note on wikipedia about the "judge" in that case: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Mahoney

He was a Justice of the Peace. The jury found there was no consideration. If this truly was a jury of Daly's peers than you can rest assured they were just as nutty as him. The decision was overturned by other courts and is not good precedent for anything.

I couldn't find anything about overturns on appeal at a higher level, and you'd know better then me, but aren't justice of the peace elected down in the states and don't really have to have any basis in Law?

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by mikey_the_redneck

Oh I see. I will try and get it later.......it was a businessman (in Colorado I think) who decided not to pay income tax because there was no law that said you had to.......and he was successful.

It was a lawyer in Minny, later disbarred.

[mikey_the_redneck]

Originally Posted by Gozer

Captain found, summarized, and opined on the details before you even finished your incredulous opposition to being asked to post them.

Well good for Captain! He must be your hero.........

[Gozer]

Originally Posted by mikey_the_redneck

Well good for Captain! He must be your hero.........

No, he's just not a troll.

The bar is set pretty low around here.

[Jason14h]

The leader is good, The leader is great......

[fredr123]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

I couldn't find anything about overturns on appeal at a higher level, and you'd know better then me, but aren't justice of the peace elected down in the states and don't really have to have any basis in Law?

I'm not sure that case was overturned on appeal. I think it was later cases heard by higher courts that refused to follow it.

I don't know much about how judges and JPs obtained their post back then.

The part that stuck out a lot for me was that it was a jury that determined the important questions in the Daly case. Juries aren't required to provide any reasons for their decisions so we'll never know why they decided like they did.

[CaptainCrunch]

More interesting information on this case, including documents around the disbarment

http://www.fights4rights.com/1/daily.php

Sounds like Daley got into trouble for practicing law without a license.

http://bulk.resource.org/courts.gov/...8.77-1013.html

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by mikey_the_redneck

Well good for Captain! He must be your hero.........

Wow, thats all you've got?

[mikey_the_redneck]

Originally Posted by Gozer

No, he's just not a troll.

The bar is set pretty low around here.

Well, I don't consider myself a troll, and that is all that matters.

Sorry I was never on the debate team gozer.......and that I do not meet your standards. Maybe you could hang out at a super-formal board somewhere where every word and argument is picked to death. But I like to have a little fun you know.

Maybe instead of bitching about the "low bar" around here, you just keep your mouth shut and participate in other threads........I just see some people here like to take the safe route and pile on someone and try to make them look foolish. That is easy to do from behind a monitor. I was just trying to deflect a little of the unfair posts toward Tower........I guess I did a good job of that.

[fredr123]

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-utl/friv_tax.pdf

A 77 page response to "frivolous" tax arguments compiled by the Internal Revenue Service. It's dated February 2009 and comes complete with buttloads of case law.

[mikey_the_redneck]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Wow, thats all you've got?

Well you did the work for me..........

[@theCBE]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

More interesting information on this case, including documents around the disbarment

http://www.fights4rights.com/1/daily.php

Sounds like Daley got into trouble for practicing law without a license.

http://bulk.resource.org/courts.gov/...8.77-1013.html

Not only was the lawyer disbarred but the Justice of the Peace had been prohibited from participating in proceedings pending a review of his conduct by the Supreme Court of Minnesota.

He died before it could go anywhere, although he was initially represented by the lawyer for whom he ruled in favour of. I'm sure that breaks about a million ethics rules...

http://www.fights4rights.com/data/Su...Misconduct.pdf

[Gozer]

Originally Posted by mikey_the_redneck

Well, I don't consider myself a troll, and that is all that matters.

*Participation ribbon*

Originally Posted by mikey_the_redneck

Sorry I was never on the debate team gozer.......and that I do not meet your standards. Maybe you could hang out at a super-formal board somewhere where every word and argument is picked to death. But I like to have a little fun you know.

Sharing info about specific legal cases you are asking fellow posters to refute isn't super-formal. It's simple courtesy.

Originally Posted by mikey_the_redneck

I just see some people here like to take the safe route and pile on someone and try to make them look foolish. That is easy to do from behind a monitor. I was just trying to deflect a little of the unfair posts toward Tower........I guess I did a good job of that.

I don't mind Tower, he posts his sources and enables other posters to learn where he is coming from and encourages them to make up their own minds.

You spout third-hand garbage and pass it off as substantive contributions.

You're worse than a DESS-type troll that has some fun and sprays lemon juice in people's eyes, because you don't know how dumb you sound.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by mikey_the_redneck

Well you did the work for me..........

No I did the work to basically refute your point of view. Thats not competent debating, nor smart.

It would be equivalent to me going into a debate in university with no facts and all speculation and my only rebuttle would be oh yeah, your mamma.

Its a fail all around.

Me for bothering to do the work, you for looking foolish.

[mikey_the_redneck]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

No I did the work to basically refute your point of view. Thats not competent debating, nor smart.

It would be equivalent to me going into a debate in university with no facts and all speculation and my only rebuttle would be oh yeah, your mamma.

Its a fail all around.

Me for bothering to do the work, you for looking foolish.

You talked about the case in the movie where the guy won possession of his home back from the bank.....thank you.

[mikey_the_redneck]

Gozer...........if I was like DESS I would not be here anymore. I may not be good at this debating thing, but I try to be honest.

[Tower]

Originally Posted by mikey_the_redneck

Well..........even though work is not too busy at the moment I cannot just go home and watch a movie to write down some names/dates for you. Although CaptainCrunch may be talking about the same one.....

Nor are you responsible too. It is up to each individual to work out his actions. You believe and that is what matters. there are others who do not believe and that is what matters to them.

[ResAlien]

Originally Posted by mikey_the_redneck

Well..........even though work is not too busy at the moment I cannot just go home and watch a movie to write down some names/dates for you. Although CaptainCrunch may be talking about the same one.....

Originally Posted by Tower

Nor are you responsible too. It is up to each individual to work out his actions. You believe and that is what matters. there are others who do not believe and that is what matters to them.

Wrong. Wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong. The person making the ludicrous and outlandish claims has to attempt to provide some proof. It's the most basic of CP principles, Tower. Not doing it? Pretty much the definition of trolling.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by Tower

Nor are you responsible too. It is up to each individual to work out his actions. You believe and that is what matters. there are others who do not believe and that is what matters to them.

Are..........you.............serious?