Skip to main content

Can I please have an honest attorney give me the facts the Constitution codes are applicable to me. What happen to my autonomy.

Alma, GA |

I am not asking for circular reasoning, arbitrary mean spirited opinions, just facts. See opinions are deletions, distraction and distortions. Facts are reality. I don't want a history lesson. How is being born within some political lines factually make me a political fiction called a citizen and makes the Constitution codes applicable to me. Come on you guy's are Doctors in the Science of Law. Please give me the what, where, who and how 4 pieces of paper are applicable to me? Factually, other than force, coercion, intimidation and violence how did my birth make me a citizen obligated to the Constitution? Is my personal autonomy not my factual freedom? Just asking educated mines that don't think I am retard asking for facts. Is there some conflict with the "Bar" affecting your answers?

+ Read More

Attorney answers 4

Posted

"How is being born within some political lines factually make me a political fiction called a citizen and makes the Constitution codes applicable to me. "

Because it is. Anyone born within the US is a US citizen.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural-born-citizen_clause#Court_decisions

↓ Mark this answer as "Helpful" or "Best Answer" if you like it. For more information, contact us at www.SteakleyLawFirm.com or (404) 835-7595. The initial consultation is always free for Avvo users.

Posted

There are those things that just are. Here,as in any country in the world, your birth there conveys "citizenship" . While I feel some constraint in offering an opinion as to other places one my exist on this planet, citizenship here come not only with some burdens but also with many priviledges. Should you dislike the burdens more than you enjoy the benefit, Please leave.

The above is not intended as legal advice. The response does not constitute the creation of an attorney client relationship as this forum does not provide for a confidential communication.

Asker

Posted

Very nasty comment Sir! I see I touch a nerve with the lawyer here. Still I get opinions. Your descendants most likely are the European terrorist who massacred my descendants and kidnapped and brutally enslaved the others of my ethnic background. You give me a childish opinion "Those are things that just are." Wow, and you got an advance university degree? Well sir you answered my question for me. I am a citizen and the constitution and codes are applicable to me because of a judges, lawyers or cops coercion, intimidation and the threat of violence. So you guy's have to commit felonies against my autonomy to create and autonomy for me? No offence, but who are you to give the opinion being a white man, that I reaped any benefits being a descendant of slaves and Native Americans factually. Very rude. Your baseless opinions are why people get blown up at an event where innocent people gather in peace and non-violence. You have the typical mindset of a anti-social psychopath as in any other bureaucrat. I'll pray for you.

Harry Edward Hudson Jr

Harry Edward Hudson Jr

Posted

You touch a nerve with a veteran and a citizen who does not accept your premise. [There is no viable and accepted political theory that you or anyone else has an inalienable or other assertable rigth to the personal autonnomy you wish to claim]. I know many people of all races, ethnic and political backgrounds who are successful. They are and will continue to be successful in all that that word encompasses because they believe in themselves, work hard and don't whine about their percieved misfortune and are meaningflly involved in the betterment of society..

Asker

Posted

Still your opinion. Just admit you don't know. Here is a dissent from retired Judge Brennan: "The document that the plurality construes today is unfamiliar to me. It is not the living charter that I have taken to be our Constitution; it is instead a stagnant, archaic, hidebound document steeped in the prejudices and superstition of a time long past. This Constitution does not recognize that times change, does not see that sometimes a practice or rule outlives its foundations. I cannot accept an interpretive method that does such violence to the charter that I am bound by oath to uphold." Michael H. v. Gerald D., 491 U.S. 110, 141 (1989) (Brennan, J., dissenting). How can anyone be involved in the betterment of a society when that society's S.O.P. is forcing individuals to pay for a service based on involuntary participation (Slavery). If I touched a nerve get in your car and volunteer a little of your time in a youth home or senior citizen center to release the frustration. You elect to be a submitizen and veteran nobody put a gun to your head to do it right?

Harry Edward Hudson Jr

Harry Edward Hudson Jr

Posted

I am a citizen. As such , I recognize and accept the fact that I have certin priviledges. I also have certain obligations which I owe to this society. [vote, jury duty, etc.] You also need to go back to school to learn to read and comprehend. Justice Brennan's dissent des not even remotely support your original assertions. He was speaking of a method of constitutional interpretation / construction. He does not say society is not bound by such instruments. Volunteer??? I am and have been an active member of charitble orgainzations as well as providing pro bono services in the legal field. We will never agree. You are entitled to your opinion and I to mine.

Posted

Fact: the interpretation of your legal rights and obligations is made by the judge assigned to the case, and ultimately by the judges on appeal. That is the version that will be enforced by judges, police officers, and prison guards, whether you think it is correct or not. Your opinion, or my opinion, does not change the fact that officials will obey judges, not us.

Fact: the Fourteenth Amendment to the US Constitution says all persons born or naturalized within the United States are citizens of the United States. The language does not appear to contain any exception. No judge as far as I know has ruled this to be a political fiction.

Fact: the laws of the US usually apply to both citizens and non-citizens, making the issue of citizenship irrelevant in many cases. For example, Manuel Noriega was convicted of violating US drug laws even though he was not a US citizen, and was actually President of Panama when the US government forcibly abducted him from Panama and put him in a US prison.

Fact: if anyone could exempt himself from US or state laws by declaring that he was not a citizen, then there would be no effective way of enforcing any law. While that might be all right with you, it is not all right with the judges, and not all right with most of the numerous US citizens and residents who count on the protection of the law. Murder and robbery would be much more common, as would be uncontrolled revenge. The majority apparently believe that a "civil society" governed by laws is better than a "free society" where anyone can do anything he wants until his enemy kills or overpowers him.

Fact: all governance is based on force and coercion by the government. In some ways, government action is restricted by law. If there were no enforceable laws, then government would be even more powerful than it is now, as there would be no protection against roving bands of government agents performing illegal search, kidnapping, murder, robbery, sexual assault, etc.

Fact: by leaving the US, a person might find a more hospitable legal environment than he finds in the US, but there is no place on the planet free from government intimidation and violence, except perhaps a few very remote areas that governments have trouble getting to.

Opinion: disagreeing with the powers that be does not make a person mentally retarded, and a mentally retarded person would be unable to formulate such a complex question as you have asked.

Good luck.

Contact me at 248-399-6930 for a free consultation. You and I do not have an attorney-client relationship formed by our communications on this website. Advice given by me on this website is general advice based on partial information. You should not rely on any advice given without first hiring a lawyer in the area where the case is pending, and providing that lawyer with full information.

Asker

Posted

Wow, I believe you gave me circular reasoning; the code is applicable because its the code! Just change the word law into opinion. Number two your own Judges (men & women in black robes) made there own bed to lie in citing Bowers v. DeVito and DeShanney v. Winnebago, factually stating the government has no duty to protect anyone. So I don't understand this public relations scheme of involuntary protection. I know when growing up in New York the Mafia did that number on a number of businesses and it was a crime. The day of involuntary support is coming to an end. When the government can't prove four element of the crimes committed by Wall Street and spends a billion dollars a week in Afghanistan when millions of people (citizens) in America are unemployed, starving, homeless and suffering from terrible health issues, where is the protection and privilege Attorney Hudson is talking about. I seen at event where doctors volunteer their service for free to the underserved, never once have I see any politicians or bureaucrats at these events offering to provide services or representation. Sir, I pay for everything I own through Jesus Christ. I get no privileges because I am not a bureaucrat. A citizen factually is someone who has a duty of allegiance for a duty of protection right (reciprocal agreement) . I am not a citizen but a man who lived in North America. I am a descendant of Slaves and Native Americans who suffered a holocaust by the national, state and local bureaucrats. What evidence is there proving a factual principal - agent agreement was formed without using the words statue, code, city, state or government. What empirical proof there was a meeting of the minds for me to enter into a reciprocal agreement with any body politic? Could the answer factually be that I am a slave to this government, still in bondage by four pieces of paper that is not a contract? Can I impose my will on other people because I say so without getting shot dead in the street? If your next door neighbor gave you a piece of paper that said you have to cut his grass everyday and the neighbor across the street signed it would you be bound to cut his grass? How about if your next door neighbor told you he believe in Santa Claus and you stated you did not, if he put a gun to your head and said you have to believe in Santa too, or get lock en his basement or shot dead in the street, is this not a violation to your personal autonomy and a violent act. So what is so different with bureaucrats. Last point, if your state was the Catholic Diocese and your town was a parish, would that make you a Catholic required to pay tithes and offering to the Catholic church? What evidence could the Catholic Diocese provide that you are a Catholic and their constitution or codes are applicable to you? Thank you for your factual answer that we are forced through coercion, intimidation and violence to provide involuntary support by bureaucrats and the government. You where on point unlike your very rude colleagues.

Posted

You are a citizen if you were born or naturalized in the United States, and while you may disagree, all the courts and all the lawyers think otherwise.

Asker

Posted

Hi Charles. Factually I am a man and it is the opinion of violent, anti-social psychopaths that I am a citizen with the fictitious notion, I have a duty of allegiance for a duty of protection. My birth evolved from Slaves and Native Americans. You have an advance university degree so you know the truth about the history of this America. It was brought about through no less of an act, 100 times worst than Hitler and Bin Laden's against Native Americans, Mexicans and imported Chinese and Black slaves. And as you stated all courts and all lawyers think otherwise because factually to keep up that fiction guarantee's you guy's a pay check. It would be find with the whole government fictional opinions (law) if it was created through voluntary support and not anti-social, violent psychopaths who have stated they have no duty to protect any individual. See; (Bowers v. DeVito & DeShanney v. Winnebago). Now, I never take a legal posture Charles, because I am not an attorney. Are you telling me that because I am not a bureaucrat or attorney I have no right to my personal autonomy? Of course there is a need to control crimes such as DUI, Murder and other violent crimes but that's getting into another whole physiological issue. The problem I see with government control through involuntary support is, how can the government commit crimes against ones personal autonomy and say its for the good of it's citizens. A prime example is living at the will of 536 individual men and women called Congress. I don't know, nor ever met not one of these individuals. How can they represent me when they don't even know me nor do they, and the Super Attorney's dba the Supreme Court ever agree on anything. If there decisions negatively affect the lives of millions like sending thousand of young men and women to die and get maimed because of their incompetence and its factually proven, how is it they have immunity for the felonies they have committed against thousands of once able bodied men and women and families. Let's look at Wall Street, DOJ Doctor at Law could not find four elements of the crimes Wall Street executives committed to have me close the doors of my business of 12 years, and driving my neighbors in this country into poverty? I'm from Brooklyn N.Y. my friend. I have no love for cops, judges and the government. When Eleanor Bumpers, Abadul Diallo and numerous others got murder by the cop and the cops went free I was done with this system of fictional justice and government. The is not empirical proof the constitution codes are applicable to me and believe me, because the law and your professions legalese is so convoluted, I do very effective damage control in traffic court and the likes Judge Coolidge in Savannah State Court lies, coercion, intimidation and threat of violence could did not work nor will it work for any prosecutor or cops. Remember the key is "personal first hand knowledge, facts and evidence" Thanks for your time and please be a God fair man first, lawyer second! Pray your strength in the Lord my friend.

Asker

Posted

excuse the misspelled words. rushing a bit.

Charles Thomas Jr.

Charles Thomas Jr.

Posted

So, if you think we are all wrong, go to court and seek a declaration of all you assert, then wait for the court to dismiss it, because it makes no sense.

Asker

Posted

From a lawyer DBA a Supreme Court Justice: "Our Constitution was not intended to preserve a preexisting society but to make a new one, to put in place new principles that the prior political community had not sufficiently recognized!' The document that the plurality construes today is unfamiliar to me. It is not the living charter that I have taken to be our Constitution; it is instead a stagnant, archaic, hidebound document steeped in the prejudices and superstition of a time long past. This Constitution does not recognize that times change, does not see that sometimes a practice or rule outlives its foundations. I cannot accept an interpretive method that does such violence to the charter that I am bound by oath to uphold." Michael H. v. Gerald D., 491 U.S. 110, 141 (1989) (Brennan, J., dissenting).

Charles Thomas Jr.

Charles Thomas Jr.

Posted

The key word being "Dissenting." Meaning the rest of the Court disagreed, and Justice Brennan's position (which I happen to agree with in this case) lost.

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.

Ask a Question

- or -

Search for lawyers by reviews and ratings.

Find a Lawyer