[jetgraphics]

How do we know that elders are stupid?

In the Declaration of Independence, it says that governments are instituted among men to help secure rights endowed by our Creator. . . rights like life, liberty and property ownership.

But from day one, the government denied the inalienable rights of the folks known as "the militia".

Title 10 USC Sec. 311. Militia: composition and classes
(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, CITIZENS of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are—
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

Title 50 USC Sec. 453. Registration (Selective Service)
(a)...it shall be the duty of every male CITIZEN of the United States, and every other male person RESIDING in the United States, who, on the day or days fixed for the first or any subsequent registration, is between the ages of eighteen and twenty-six, to present himself for and submit to registration at such time or times and place or places, and in such manner, as shall be determined by proclamation of the President and by rules and regulations prescribed hereunder.

Art. 1, Sec. 8, USCON
Congress shall have power ... To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;

Articles of Confederation, IV.
...every State shall always keep up a well-regulated and disciplined militia, sufficiently armed and accoutered, and shall provide and constantly have ready for use, in public stores, a due number of filed pieces and tents, and a proper quantity of arms, ammunition and camp equipage.

The Supreme Court has held, in Butler v. Perry, 240 U.S. 328 (1916), that the Thirteenth Amendment does not prohibit "enforcement of those duties which individuals owe to the state, such as services in the army, militia, on the jury, etc." In Selective Draft Law Cases, 245 U.S. 366 (1918), the Supreme Court ruled that the military draft was not "involuntary servitude".

Is that clear? Militia duty is VOLUNTARY servitude. However, it is evident that the many "Draft Dodgers" were unaware of their voluntary choice in the matter. Being obligated to train, fight, and die, if necessary, on command of government is definitely a deprivation of inalienable rights and would appear to conflict with the Declaration of Independence.

Can we solve this conundrum?

Back to the Declaration of Independence - - -
It also states that governments get their power to govern from those who consent to be governed.

Okay - if you haven't given consent, then all government can do is help secure your rights. If you're criminally injured, you can file a complaint, and the government will prosecute on your behalf. If you're a corpse, that's implicit consent to prosecute on your behalf. (Which explains the importance of a corpse - without which consent to prosecute is not evident.)

What characteristics define the militia:
1. Able bodied males between 17 and 45, and
2. Citizens of the U.S.A.

Well, we can be sure that no one "volunteered" to be males. So that must mean citizenship is VOLUNTARY, and all civic duties associated with citizenship are voluntary servitude in exchange for the privileges afforded to those who exercise political liberty.

In short, all you "voluntary" citizens have waived your inalienable rights to life, liberty, etc, and are obligated to train, fight and die on command.

THAT IS THE LAW.

But, wait, the 14th amendment says that all persons born within the jurisdiction of the United States are citizens and of the state in which they reside.

"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside." [14th Amendment, Section 1.]

FEDERAL CORPORATIONS - The United States government is a foreign corporation with respect to a state. - - - Volume 19, Corpus Juris Secundum XVIII. Foreign Corporations, Sections 883,884

From reading the U.S. Constitution, it is clear that the federal government has no jurisdiction in any state unless by consent. It must ask permission to even buy land to erect necessary buildings and forts.

Are you their "person", are you their "subject"?

"In common usage, the term 'person' does not include the sovereign, [and] statutes employing the [word] are ordinarily construed to exclude it." Wilson v. Omaha Indian Tribe, 442 U.S. 653, 667, 61 L.Ed2. 153, 99 S.Ct. 2529 (1979) (quoting United States v. Cooper Corp. 312 U.S. 600, 604, 85 L.Ed. 1071, 61 S.Ct. 742 (1941)).

"A Sovereign cannot be named in any statute as merely a 'person' or 'any person'".
Wills v. Michigan State Police, 105 L.Ed. 45 (1989)

Who is the "sovereign" that is not a "person"?

People are supreme, not the state.
Waring v. the Mayor of Savannah, 60 GA at 93.

The people of the state, as the successors of its former sovereign, are entitled to all the rights which formerly belonged to the king by his own prerogative.
Lansing v. Smith, (1829) 4 Wendell 9, (NY)

At the Revolution, the sovereignty devolved on the people and they are truly the sovereigns of the country.
Chisholm v. Georgia, 2 Dall. 440, 463

It will be admitted on all hands that with the exception of the powers granted to the states and the federal government, through the Constitutions, the people of the several states are unconditionally sovereign within their respective states.
Ohio L. Ins. & T. Co. v. Debolt 16 How. 416, 14 L.Ed. 997

In America, however, the case is widely different. Our government is founded upon compact. Sovereignty was, and is, in the people.
[ Glass vs The Sloop Betsey, 3 Dall 6 (1794)]

Sovereignty itself is, of course, not subject to law, for it is the author and source of law; but in our system, while sovereign powers are delegated to the agencies of government, sovereignty itself remains with the people, by whom and for whom all government exists and acts.
[Yick Wo vs Hopkins, 118 U.S. 356, 370 (1886)]

It appears that American people are sovereign.

CITIZEN - ... Citizens are members of a political community who, in their associative capacity, have established or submitted themselves to the dominion of government for the promotion of the general welfare and the protection of their individual as well as collective rights.
- - - Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Ed. p.244

SUBJECT - One that owes allegiance to a sovereign and is governed by his laws.
...Men in free governments are subjects as well as citizens; as citizens they enjoy rights and franchises; as subjects they are bound to obey the laws. The term is little used, in this sense, in countries enjoying a republican form of government.
- - - Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, p. 1425

"... the term 'citizen,' in the United States, is analogous to the term "subject" in the common law; the change of phrase has resulted from the change in government. ... he who before was a "subject of the King" is now a citizen of the State."
State v. Manuel, 20 N.C. 144 (1838)

This may surprise many folks, but in American law, the people are sovereign (served by government) but the citizens are subjects (obligated to serve government).

Is there any other evidence that the government recognizes that there are American PEOPLE who are not CITIZENS?

Articles of Confederation (1777)

Article IV. The better to secure and perpetuate mutual friendship and intercourse among the people of the different states in this union, the free inhabitants of each of these states ...shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of free citizens in the several states ...

In fact, there's another important aspect of America's governments, explicit in the Articles, that is rarely covered in "Social Studies":

Article I. The Stile of this confederacy shall be "The United States of America".

Article II. Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every Power, Jurisdiction and right, which is not by this confederation expressly delegated to the United States, in Congress assembled.

Please note: The 50 states united are the "United States of America".
The "United States" (federal government) refers to Congress, and its two other branches - executive and judicial.

Didn't the Constitution change everything?

Not really. It is mostly reorganization of the Federal government. All the powers delegated to the United States by the States united were listed in Article 1, Section 8 of the USCON. In fact, there are some powers listed in the Articles, but not listed in the USCON, that American governments still exercise.

Another tidbit:

"But, indeed, no private person has a right to complain, by suit in Court, on the ground of a breach of the Constitution. The Constitution, it is true, is a compact, but he is not a party to it. The States are the parties to it. And they may complain...."
- - -Padelford, Fay & Co. vs. Mayor and Alderman, City of Savannah, 14 Ga. 438, 520 (1854) Supreme Court of Georgia

The U.S. Constitution is a compact between the STATES united and the United States, in Congress assembled. The private people (non-citizens) are not party to the agreement.

Okay, is that clear?
The private people, the free inhabitants, who are not subject citizens are the sovereigns that government serves. Do you know the difference between an inhabitant and a resident?

"INHABITANT - One who resides actually and permanently in a given place, and has his domicile there."
- - - Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, p.782

"DOMICILE - A person's legal home. That place where a man has his true, fixed, and permanent home and principal establishment, and to which whenever he is absent he has the intention of returning."
- - - Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, p.484

"RESIDENCE - Place where one actually lives ... Residence implies something more than physical presence and something less than domicile. The terms 'resident' and 'residence' have no precise legal meaning... [One can have many residences but only one domicile]
- - - Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, p.1308, 1309

"RESIDENT - ...when used as a noun, means a dweller, habitant, or occupant; one who resides or dwells in a place for a period of more, or less duration...
Resident has many meanings in law, largely determined by statutory context in which it is used."
- - - Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, p.1309

Did someone forget to tell Americans that inhabitants have domiciles, not residences? That sovereign Americans have permanent legal homes, while subject citizens / residents merely reside at temporary residences?

Now you know why the next generation is certain that their elders are stupid, and easily indoctrinated to believe whatever they're told. The elders surrendered their magnificent birthright of sovereignty, freedom and independence, for "entitlements" of national socialism. No one bothered to read the law, available in any county courthouse law library. No one asked to see THE LAW that compelled them to surrender their endowment from their Creator. To this day, the average elder believes that America has a democratic form of government, which is entirely false.

United States Constitution, Article 4, Section 4. The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; ....

REPUBLICAN GOVERNMENT. One in which the powers of sovereignty are vested in the people and are exercised by the people, ... directly, .... In re Duncan, 139 U.S. 449, 11 S.Ct. 573, 35 L.Ed. 219; Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. (21 Wall.) 162, 22 L.Ed. 627. - - - Black's Law Dictionary

In the Republican form, the PEOPLE are the sovereigns, and DIRECTLY exercise that sovereignty over their private property (absolutely owned). And that right to absolutely own private property is enshrined in the fifth amendment. But most Americans do not know what private property is.

"PRIVATE PROPERTY - As protected from being taken for public uses, is such property as belongs absolutely to an individual, and of which he has the exclusive right of disposition. Property of a specific, fixed and tangible nature, capable of being in possession and transmitted to another, such as houses, lands, and chattels."
- - - Black's Law dictionary, sixth ed., p.1217

"OWNERSHIP - ... Ownership of property is either absolute or qualified. The ownership of property is absolute when a single person has the absolute dominion over it... The ownership is qualified when it is shared with one or more persons, when the time of enjoyment is deferred or limited, or when the use is restricted. "
- - -Black's Law dictionary, sixth ed., p. 1106

Absolute ownership by individuals has been part of American law from the beginning. Of course, under today's benevolent socialist democratic form of government, the State routinely takes property and does not pay just compensation. And if it does not pay just compensation, you have proof that it is not private property, absolutely owned, and protected from being taken for public use. Did you know that you surrendered your endowment to absolutely own?

Again, more proof that elders are stupid. They squandered the benefits of liberty that their forefathers fought and died to bestow upon them.

We know that the founding generation were not so stupid.

Virginia Constitution, 1776.

SEC. 6. That elections of members to serve as representatives of the people, in assembly, ought to be free; and that all men, having sufficient evidence of permanent common interest with, and attachment to, the community, have the right of suffrage, and cannot be taxed or deprived of their property for public uses, without their own consent, or that of their representatives so elected, nor bound by any law to which they have not, in like manner, assembled, for the public good.

All men ... cannot be taxed without their own consent.
All men ... cannot be deprived of their property for public uses without their own consent.
All men ... cannot be bound by any law that is not for the public good.

(If you recall, the "free inhabitants" were not the citizens voting for "representation" and therefore were not bound by such laws.)

In the event of the collapse of the profligate "democratic socialist" government, please remember to honor the republican form, promised to the free inhabitants, domiciled in these united States of America.

Let us hope that the next generation is not so stupid as to be fooled into "voluntary servitude" without full knowledge and consent.

And just in case there are some elders who still don't know WHY Americans cannot tolerate communists, let's read what they admitted:

From the Communist manifesto:
"In this sense, the theory of the Communists may be summed up in the single sentence: Abolition of private property."

Amendment V, US Constitution 1789
... nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

If you think it is wise to surrender your absolute ownership of your self, your labor, and all that you acquire by that labor, then feel free to volunteer. But do not be so "wise" as to compel others into servitude.

"No one should suffer / die because they lack {fill in the blank}" must always be prefaced with "No one should be compelled to labor for the benefit of another, so that ..."

Slavery is never an acceptable solution for the ills that plague mankind.

Voluntary charity is a blessing.
Compulsory charity is a curse.