Dog Fouling & Littering Fines
-
Posts
-
[quote quote=116667]Sorry ladies, but is this thread still about dog crap?
[/quote]
I think it’s moved on from dogs to bulls.
[quote quote=116659]Hogwash. Another pathetic attempt to get people to click on these links and enter the frankly deluded world of freedom of the land.
[/quote]No it’s about getting people to read & research evidence posted by others based on their own experience – how can you beat that? this link will add more fuel to the fire.
look at the comment further down by yooooochoooooob this is worth a read. Tells how we the populus are done over by those money grabbing corrupt council thugs.
[quote quote=116665]FMOTL is dangerous rubbish.
Acts/statutes/laws apply to all. You cant opt out of the ones you dislike
Just try refusing to give a breath sample when required to do so as per the Road Traffic ACT 1988. Better still, film it for proof. This would be an easy demonstration of FMOTL.
Rob- The “official notice” is nothing of the sort. Notices do not overide the rule of law.
[/quote]First of all what to you is the rule of Law? – Common Law or Statute/acts? again research from what I can find Common Law is superior to statutes/acts.
this is not about opting out of what is not liked its about getting those in “authority” to prove thier rules apply to us. Look at what I have earlier & prove me WRONG then. So far questions I have asked of you they have not been answered properly. If you cant answer say so I will respect you more.
As posted earlier don’t give details
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CMMzDLo2dlw
The only reason RTA1988 was altered about breathalyzer was to to control motorists – to give more leverage to coppers.
[quote quote=116667]Sorry ladies, but is this thread still about dog crap?
[/quote]Yes it is but also it encompasses alot more.
[quote quote=116665]FMOTL is dangerous rubbish.
Acts/statutes/laws apply to all. You cant opt out of the ones you dislike
Just try refusing to give a breath sample when required to do so as per the Road Traffic ACT 1988. Better still, film it for proof. This would be an easy demonstration of FMOTL.
Rob- The “official notice” is nothing of the sort. Notices do not overide the rule of law.
[/quote]This is a better example of NOT giving samples & refusing to give details.
This is the follow up by the bloke arrested.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8wZuYm7wsI
Watch & listen VERY carefully. Comment further on what you think. Based on experience, how can that be surpassed? To me its obvious we are being had over for the rule & thugary of a private corporation. Or do you think this is all staged a deliberate hoax? Remember the addage, corporations rule the day!
Here is an example of failing to provide.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uOK1bQgtMKc
What she should ask is how is it a criminal offense to not give? How is this woman committing an offense? Who says she has to obey? How do “they” have authoroty over her? All am asking to do is prove it! How do statutes/acts apply to anyone? If no one answers (don’t just say because they do) it will stand as truth for me at least they don’t. I have explained in previous post about various definitions of various things no -one has put up anything to prove wrong – go ahead if you can!
Just as a side line: Read your council tax demand, on it is written “Bill” & notice it is NOT signed by anyone. If statues/acts do apply to all then surely they apply to the council as well. So here is something to think about.
http://www.getoutofdebtfree.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=60&t=101035
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
