Person, Individual

[Ice]

For your consideration:


A "person" - maxim - Homo vocabulum est naturae; persona juris civilis 'man' is a term of nature; 'person' is a term of civil law.& Black's 4th, "PERSON" Term may include <U>artificial beings</U>, as corporations... relating to taxation and the revenue laws. People vs. Mclean, 80 N.Y. 254. <U>A person is such, not because he is human, but because rights and duties are ascribed</U> to him.& The person is a legal subject or substance of which the rights and duties are attributes.


Black's 4th "INDIVIDUAL" As a noun, this term denotes a single person as distinguished from group or class, and also, very commonly, a private or natural person as distinguished from a partnership, corporation, or association; but it is said that this restrictive signification is <U>not necessarily inherent in the word, and that it may, in proper cases include artificial persons</U>. State vs. Bell Telephone Co. 36 Ohio St. 310 Am. Rep. 583. As an adjective, "individual" means pertaining or belonging to, or characteristic of, one single person, either in opposition to a firm, association, or corporation, or considered in his relation thereto.


&

[goldphoenix]

Hi Ice,


Good info!


Any idea on the definition of "natural" when used with "person"?


&


goldphoenix

good question, ive always wondered what the legal definition of individual is also because thats important when using the defense that u are not a "person" subject to the codes.

[FlunkyNoMo]

<FONT face="courier new, courier, mono">It appears we have some cross-over topics.
In the thread "enacting clause" I typed in the definition of 'natural'. There are also definitions of 'person', 'individual'...etc.
In short, natural=idiot. It's all part of the word games they play when writing the codes.
If a word is used in the codes that is outside of the "common use" definition it must be defined within the code definitions. If you read the code without reading the definitions section <U>first</U> (one of the first sections), one may be misled&by&an understanding of what the words mean in "<U>daily usage</U>" and not the&meaning as defined within that particular code.
I could use the word "earth" to describe the "sky", if I defined it as such within a contract. i.e. The earth's the limit when it comes to the word games policymakers play!!(Notice, I didn't call them <U>lawmakers</U>.)
"Common usage" is the definition in a Webster's, not the way it is used in our daily lives. Who the heck is this Webster guy anyhow?</FONT>


<FONT face="courier new, courier, mono"> FNM
</FONT>

If they ever drag me into court and ask to "swear under oath," I'm just gonna pick my nose and ask 'em who exactly it is they're talking to. Am I being perceived as a "person," an "individual," a "natural," WHAT?


So infuriating that "persons" in power so manipulated the very basic stuff of communication....


Gonna tie 'em behind my big ol' truck and drag 'em 'cross country....


Randy

[FlunkyNoMo]

Randy
Seeing as to I'm the natural (idiot) that posted the bad info, I felt it necessary to post a link to James' superior command of the english language:
http://www.suijuris.net/main/suijuri...showtopic=1871

I apologize for any confusion I may have cuased, and hope this corrects My error.
Thank You again James for Your contribution to this forum. Your knowledge is valued and appreciated, even when it exposes My english-retardation.


Willing to admit I'm still a little Flunky, striving&to be &FNM

[James]

<H1 style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt"></SPAN></H1>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"><SPAN style="COLOR: black; FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">FNM</SPAN></SPAN>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"><SPAN style="COLOR: black; FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"><?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o></o></SPAN>&<o></o></SPAN>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">Thank you for having a teachable spirit. I have a lot of respect for a teachable spirit. We all have something to contribute. You are no flunky in my book.<o></o></SPAN>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">It is only when you have a very strict discipline of the language that a nation of law, not men, is possible. The legal profession has led the way to a deterioration of the Constitution and it came about by violation of grammar. </SPAN>

James....


Excluding parents, one person had more influence in my life than any other. Her name was Anne Thomason, 10th grade English teacher. Three maxims:


1) Words mean things.
2) Before one can define what something "is," one must first define what it "is not."
3) Before reasonable discussion can take place, there must be agreement on the definition of terms.


Remember, 10th grade for me was 1967. I once turned in a paper, got it back and, written across the front in blood-red ink was a huge "BS." (Right. I got a "nothing" for that!) In front of God and everyone, she said, "Don't you ever put words on paper just to take up space. Every word means something. Every word counts. If not, it's just bull-****!"


Remarkable lady.


But now Humpty-Dumpty has taken over. (At least I think it was ol' Humpty) who, in Alice in Wonderland, said something to the effect of "...words mean only what I want them to mean.


Okay. No more rambling....


Randy