Person

[rushpat]

Excerpt from Bouvier's:

PERSON. This word is applied to men, women and children, who are called natural persons

2. It is also used to denote a corporation which is an artificial person. (which is what the tax laws are talking about)

3. But when the word "Persons" is spoken of in legislative acts, natural persons will be intended, unless something appear in the context to show that it applies to artificial persons. 1 Scam. R. 178 (yeah, it's a scam alright).

4. Natural persons are divided into males, or men; and females or women.

5. They are also sometimes divided into free persons and slaves. (sometimes called taxpayers). Slaves are sometimes ranked not with persons but things. (like the strawman).

6. Persons are also divided into citizens, (q. v.) and aliens, (q. v.) when viewed with regard to their political rights. When they are considered in relation to their civil rights, they are living or civilly dead;(civilly dead?)

7. Persons are divided into legitimates and bastards (I know where some of them work...), when examined as to their rights by birth.

8. When viewed in their domestic relations, they are divided into parents and children; hushands and wives; guardians and wards; and masters and servants son, as it is understood in law,

[Ice]

The word "Person" cannot be interchanged with "Man" or "Woman".



A "Natural Person" is not a "Man".



Somewhere in this post we deduced that a Natural Person is an "idiot".



Â*



Â*

Walt Maken calls himself a "natural person" on his checks.

Scroll down toward the bottom of the page and see his check:



http://www.Angelfire.com/oh5/waltmak...finitions.html

[Jerseee]

Actually,



A person could be an individual or an organization. that is why you'll see in my posts (sometimes) I will say, "commercial person" and I will also use the term "folks". Like in, "some folks just don't understand".



I'm not consistent on this issue but that is normally my stance.

and not to drag this out any further, but...



one of the big problems is that the defintion uses the word itself to define itself. and that, unless i'm mistaken, is against the rules of definitions...



ex: person: ...natural persons...



and we're supposed to know the definition of person from that?



BUZZ! thank you for playing!



jon

[weishaupt1776]

Interesting in that criminal law is mostly heard at common law even though codified.

Since the offenses involve distinct violations and damages, the word "person" seems alot less elastic

Check Out FL statute 817.568* Criminal use of personal identification information.

Excerpt:

• 
  d)**"Individual" means a single human being and does not mean a firm, association of individuals, corporation, partnership, joint venture, sole proprietorship, or any other entity.
  
  (e)**"Person" means a "person" as defined in s. 1.01(3).

Notice that this is for "personal" identification number fraud?

Now I'm really confused

Why don't they just flat out define person like that in the vehicle code?

[Ice]

Well, I'll tell ya one thing for sure... I'm NOT a human being!

Would anyone care to venture a guess as to why I'm not?

Ice

[Akira]

Originally Posted by Ice

Well, I'll tell ya one thing for sure... I'm NOT a human being!

Would anyone care to venture a guess as to why I'm not?

Honestly, I'm not sure, it's probably just more statuatory slang for 'man'?

Title 17-A: MAINE CRIMINAL CODE
Part 1: GENERAL PRINCIPLES
Chapter 1: PRELIMINARY
§2. Definitions
20. "Person" means a human being or an organization.



This link shows a side by side comparison of the before and after "statuatory adjustments" made to Maine's Constitution.

For starters, look at the change in the name of the document itself !!

From "CONSTITUTION OF MAINE" to "CONSTITUTION of the STATE of MAINE"

Makes me wonder how the oathes of office and oathes to the Constitution itself, are written.

Now scroll down to section 3 for a blatant example....

Before:

Section 3. All men have a natural and unalienable right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their own consciences, and no one shall be hurt, molested or restrained in his liberty or estate for worshipping God in the manner and season most agreeable to the dictates of his own conscience, nor for his religious professions or sentiments, provided that he does not disturb the public peace, nor obstruct others in their religious worship;

After:

Section 3. Religious freedom; sects equal; religious tests prohibited; religious teachers. All individuals have a natural and unalienable right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their own consciences, and no person shall be hurt, molested or restrained in that person's liberty or estate for worshipping God in the manner and season most agreeable to the dictates of that person's own conscience, nor for that person's religious professions or sentiments, provided that that person does not disturb the public peace, nor obstruct others in their religious worship;

Isn't it true, they can only amend a Constitution, and then only by convention? I thought a Constitution must maintain its original wording with amendments appended, indicating which words are to be struck out and which words to be inserted?

John Appleton, the Chief Justice of the Maine Supreme Judicial Court, was appointed to compose this new unlawful arrangement of the Constitution - the CONSTITUTION of the STATE of MAINE - whose draft and arrangement was adopted by the legislature with a resolve in February 23, 1876.


Personally, I just try to stay away from anything that remotely hints of statuatory language, just to be safe. Forget all that person/human being crap, it's strictly 'man' for me.

For HIS Glory,
Akira

[Bulletproof Monk]

SOVEREIGN OR "PERSON"?

"A statute must say exactly what it means, and mean exactly what it says...there is no room for missinterpretation or confusion."


THE CORPORATIONS LAW - (remember...."corporations")

Excerpts from the Australian Taxation Office website.

"entity'' : for the purposes of Chapter 2E an ``entity'' is any of the following:
(a) a body corporate
(b) a partnership
(c) an unincorporated body
(d) an individual
(e) for a trust that has only 1 trustee - the trustee
(f) for a trust that has more than 1 trustee - the trustees together;

"person'' :
(a) has a meaning affected by section 85A; and
(b) when used in Division 2 of Part 2D.2 (sections 200B to 1813) - includes a superannuation fund;

"individual'' means a natural person



I have often been asked or told by government officials, that my carrying on business on my own makes me a "sole trader".

"sole trader'' means a person who is a member organisation of a securities exchange;

(which I am not...)

"agency'' means an agency, authority, body or person;

Now I'm really confused...are they trying to say I'm an Agency?

Here's the important one for a Sovereign:

"another jurisdiction'' means a jurisdiction other than this jurisdiction;

"jurisdiction'' means a State or the Capital Territory and, in the case of a State, includes the coastal sea of the State

SOVEREIGN OR PERSON

The issue of 'person' is of primary importance since under color of authority [unconstitutional regardless of the target populace] statutes and laws are made to affect 'person[s,'] not 'citizen' or 'sovereign.' As stated above, the sovereign is the highest authority and is supreme to all other law except the laws of the Creator.

The basic premise that no government made by man has the actual and real authority to make and impose laws on the sovereign which conflict with his unalienable rights has been well supported so far. It has additionally been supported that the only responsibility of the individual - the sovereign - is that he must not interfere with the rights of his fellow people. Therefore, barring any damage to another's rights and property, the sovereign is free to exercise his rights as he see fit.

But, what of this 'person' to which so many laws apply? Who and what is a 'person'?

Are you a 'person' in the eyes of the law?

It is a well-founded principle of law that a statute must state exactly what it means and mean exactly what it states.

"When the words of a statute are unambiguous, the first canon of statutory construction - that courts must presume that a legislature says in a statute what it means and means in a statute what it says there - is also the last, and judicial inquiry is complete." Connecticut National Bank v. Germain, 503 US 117, L. .Ed 2nd 391[1992]

And, this decision which clearly means that any vagueness is in violation of due process and, therefore, statutes must be written clearly so that the men and women of common intelligence all derive the same meaning.
"A statute which either forbids or requires the doing of an act in terms so vague that men and women of common intelligence must necessarily guess at its meaning and differ as to its application, violates the first essential of due process of law." Connally v General Const. Co., 269 U.S. 385

It is also well founded that that any term used is taken as used in its ordinary sense since it is the sovereign citizen who reads and interprets law. Thus, any technical term - or a term with several meanings - must be clearly defined within the law or the section of the regulatory document the law is part of.

Thus, we find this statute in Missouri Revised Statutes [RSMo] that clearly demands that technical or meanings from the ordinary meanings [peculiar] are understood according to their technical import.
"Words and phrases shall be taken in their plain or ordinary and usual sense, but technical words and phrases having a peculiar and appropriate meaning in law shall be understood according to their technical import." RSMo Chapter 1, Section 1.090

In everyday common use we use the word 'person' to mean a natural born man or woman. However, in law there are many different meanings peculiar to this term. Because the word has many different meanings in law, it must be treated as a technical term or having technical import with its meaning clearly defined in the section or statute being read.

The most common definition of 'person' given in statutes is that 'person' is construed to include an individual, a trust, estate, a partnership, an association, a company or corporation, or some derivation of this definition. Thus, person may have varying definitions in law that are not necessarily the common use meaning.

Therefore, we must ask exactly what is a 'legal person' since one of the terms used by governments and courts in our country is 'legal person.'
legal person: a body of persons or an entity [as a corporation] considered as having many of the rights and responsibilities of a natural person and esp. the capacity to sue and be sued. - Merriam- Webster's Dictionary of Law.

[1996.] [Note: Legal person is not a natural person but has many of the same rights, etcetera, as a natural person in the eyes of the law.]

Person. 1. A human being [a 'natural' person.] 2. A corporation [an 'artificial' person.] Corporations are treated as persons in many legal situations. Also, the word 'person' includes corporations in most definitions in this dictionary.

3. Any other 'being' entitled to sue as a legal entity [a government, an association, a group of Trustees, etc..] 4. The plural of person is persons, not people [see that word.] Oran's Dictionary of the Law, West Group 1999.

Person. An entity with legal rights and existence including the ability to sue and be sued, to sign contracts, to receive gifts, to appear in court either by themselves or by lawyer and, generally, other powers incidental to the full expression of the entity in law. Individuals are 'persons' in law unless they are minors or under some kind of other incapacity such as a court finding of mental incapacity.

Many laws give certain powers to 'persons' which, in almost all instances, includes business organizations that have been formally registered such as partnerships, corporations or associations. Duhaime's Law Dictionary.

PERSON, noun. per'sn. [Latin persona; said to be compounded of per, through or by, and sonus, sound; a Latin word signifying primarily a mask used by actors on the stage.] - Webster's 1828 Dictionary.

Note: Webster's treats 'person' as a created persona or false identity. This goes along with the 1996 dictionary in that it treats a legal person as a natural person for purposes of suits, etc.]

PERSON. This word is applied to men, women and children, who are called natural persons. In law, man and person are not exactly-synonymous terms. Any human being is a man, whether he be a member of society or not, whatever may be the rank he holds, or whatever may be his age, sex, &c. A person is a man considered according to the rank he holds in society, with all the rights to which the place he holds entitles him, and the duties which it imposes. 1 Bouv. Inst. n. 137. 2. It is also used to denote a corporation which is an artificial person. 1 Bl. Com. 123; 4 Bing. 669; C. 33 Eng. C. L R. 488; Wooddes. Lect. 116; Bac. Us. 57; 1 Mod. 164.' Bouvier's Law Dictionary, 1856, Revised 6th Edition

Is it possible, then, that 'legal person' is actually a legal fiction that is subject to government administrative laws and does not apply to the sovereign individual? If 'person' does apply to the sovereign, then 'person' must be defined as the sovereign or the 'sovereign' as the person. Remember we are talking of legal terminology, not common everyday meanings.

How does the United States Code [USC] define a 'United States person'? This is found in Title 26 [USC 26,] Subtitle F, Chapter 79, Section 7701[a,] one of the few times 'person' and 'United States person' are defined:

[1] Person. The term person shall be construed to mean and include an individual, a trust, estate, partnership, association, company or corporation.'
And, in Section 7701[a][30,] defining United States person:
[30] United States person The term ''United States person'' means -
[A] a citizen or resident of the United States,
[b] a domestic partnership,
[C] a domestic corporation, [D] any estate [other than a foreign estate, within the meaning of paragraph [31,] and -
[E] any trust if - [then requirements for establishing US control over the trust]

One might think that since 'individual' can mean a 'person' in law that the sovereign - since he is an individual - is therefore a 'person' in law. But, 'individual' also as various meanings in law, including a trust, estate, a partnership, an association, or a company or corporation.

Individual 1a. Of or relating to an individual, especially a single human:

individual consciousness. b. By or for one person: 2. Existing as a distinct

entity; separate:' American Heritage Dictionary, 4th Edition, 2000.

Entity - '1. Something that exists as a particular and discrete unit: Persons and corporations are equivalent entities under the law.' [Am. Her. Dict., supra]

[Ice]

Human being is defined as "monster".

I am a Man.

How many of those terms include the word man or woman??

Ice