|
reading..it's fundamental
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ThomPaine
The word "person" in legal terminology is perceived as a general word, which normally includes in its scope a variety of entities OTHER THAN HUMAN BEINGS. See e.g. 1 U.S.C. Church of Scientology v. U.S. Dept. of Justice (1979) 612 F 2d 417, 425.
|
Yes, it includes things other than human beings. But it does not EXCLUDE human beings. Work on that reading comprehension, boyo.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ThomPaine
"Person" means an individual, corporation, business trust, estate, trust, partnership, limited liability company, association, joint venture, government, governmental subdivision, agency, or instrumentality, or OTHER LEGAL OR COMMERCIAL ENTITY.
|
You fall under the classification "individual" in that list, chuckles. As a person, you're a legal entity.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ThomPaine
"In common usage, the term "person" does not include the sovereign, statutes employing the word person are ordinarily construed to exclude the sovereign." Wilson v. Omaha Tribe, 442 U. S. 653, 667 (1979) (quoting United States v. Cooper Corp., 312 U. S. 600, 604 (1941)). See also United States v. Mine Workers, 330 U. S. 258, 275 (1947).
|
Read the whole case you're quoting, not just some snippet you glommed from some knucklehead's website. The sovereign in the context meant by this quote is the government, not you.
__________________
We reject Skurdal's argument that he is a "free man" exempt from the laws because he has "no contracts" with either the state or federal governments...No persons in Montana may exempt themselves from any law simply by declaring they do not consent to it applying to them...Accepting Skurdal's assertion of exempt status is an invitation to anarchy. We decline that invitation. - State v. Skurdal, Supreme Court of Montana, 235 Mont. 291, 767 P.2d 304 at 308 (1988).
|