I have a very persistent militia-type who presented me with his "travel papers" in lieu of a DL. I am going through the cited cases one by one. All are archaic, misquoted, pulled out of context, or not on point, but I don't want to reinvent the wheel.

Has anyone already briefed these issues?

What are militia travel papers? Do they claim he has authority to drive an automobile?

These 'travel papers' purport to be all that is necessary for a 'Sovereign Citizen Secured Party' to drive within the United States. It is obviously some form that he downloaded from a crack-pot militia website. It basically says we are on warning not to impede the travel of this sovereign citizen. By sovereign, as he told me, he believes that he his own sovereign and not a US or Texas citizen. It then cites the UCC and has block quotes from about 10 cases.

This guy has voluntarily surrendered his DL to DPS and now presents these to whoever stops him.

This guy is enamored with these misquotes, specious common law arguments, misplaced UCC references, declaration of individual sovereignty--but he is not crazy.

I think he is influential within this anti-government movement, so I was hoping to actually address some of his errors. All of the judicial guidebooks say "Note the objections and move on." However, all this does is perpetuate their fantasy of a conspiracy to repress their interpretations and that our 'coven of conspirators' (the bar) cannot withstand their 'legitimate' attacks.

Some google searches took me to some of their forums and that is exactly what they say--that we won't answer them because we can't. Therefore I decided that I would answer him and at least give them something to chew on. I just wanted to see if anyone had already had this come up with one of their frequent pro se appeals.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by RL:
This guy is enamored with these misquotes, specious common law arguments, misplaced UCC references, declaration of individual sovereignty--but he is not crazy.
QUOTE]

Are you sure he is not touched in the head? One fry short of a happy meal?

Check with Kerr County. I seem to recall one of their assistants, perhaps Ilsa Bailey, writing an article some years ago for THE PROSECUTOR regarding dealing with these individuals.

I had run-ins with several Republic of Texas/Posse types way back in my misdemeanor days. The Rev. Mel White was one in the early 90's, but he started his own insurance company. Problems arose in numerous jurisdictions across the country and Canada for poor Mel when folks starting having accidents and wanting settlements. Mel was HQ'd in Fort Bend and Harris Counties, but before it was over, he was prosecuted in many jurisdictions and Canada for insurance fraud. He received "many years" confinement. As I recall, Mel ran homemade cardboard license tags and inspection stickers on his car.

Interestingly enough, although Mel claimed not to believe in US currency, I recall news articles that he had no problem accepting insurance premiums in cash from his customers before his downfall.

I found that many of these anti-governmentalists were also tax protesters, and that the IRS would get them soon enough. Of course, if government is illegal, then taxes are as well.

They attempt to circumvent fines by claiming to not use "the coin of the realm", and will often attempt to pay fines in bulk silver/gold or in silver and gold coinage, expecting the clerk to tell them they can't accept anything but cashier's checks, money orders or in some cases, cash. I suspect you will see a very surprised look on their face if your clerk issues them a receipt for silver/gold coinage or bulk.

I can't recall where it was, but I recall some article years ago about some jurisdiction in Texas freaking out one of these types by accepting the silver coinage they brought in to pay fines and court costs. I seem to recall the comment by the offender that he had spent all the money (coin of the realm) that he had to buy the silver in an attempt to frustrate the government, and now he was broke.

[This message was edited by GG on 06-28-07 at .]

------"This guy is enamored with these misquotes, specious common law arguments, misplaced UCC references, declaration of individual sovereignty--but he is not crazy.

Are you sure he is not touched in the head? One fry short of a happy meal?"------

Granted. He may be crazy, but not in the 'take two thorazine and some electro-shock therapy and call me in the morning' meaning of crazy, just the 'I am my own country' kind of crazy.

My point is that even if I don't change his mind, at least I may be able to convince him that reasonable people have good reason to disagree with him.

Thanks for the references. I will look into them.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by RL:
Granted. He may be crazy, but not in the 'take two thorazine and some electro-shock therapy and call me in the morning' meaning of crazy, just the 'I am my own country' kind of crazy.

My point is that even if I don't change his mind, at least I may be able to convince him that reasonable people have good reason to disagree with him. [QUOTE]

I like to avoid the "I am my own country" kind of crazy as well as the "gimme gimme shock treatment" kind of crazy whenever possible. In fact, while the latter is tolerable, understandable and sympathy inspiring, due to organic mental illness, the former is not (to me anyway).

My hunch is that you will not "convince" him that you are reasonable or that he is unreasonable. Just a hunch...mind you...

Probably true, but it's kind of fun to watch the militia man flounder and get agitated when that's the only way he can respond.

That does raise a good question: Why AM I doing this? I don't know, but it is entertaining me.

I would urge you not to argue with a Militia type, with a quote attributed to Thomas Paine: "To argue with a man who has renounced the use and authority of reason is like administering medicine to the dead."

But if you just gotta argue with him, you might cite him to the provision below, and point out that unless his "travel papers" are issued under the authority of the Armed Forces of the United States, or the Texas Adjutant General, then they come from an organization which is specifically forbidden to exist under Tedas law.

� 431.010 Texas Government Code.

Organization Prohibited

(a) Except as provided by Subsection (b), a body of persons other than the regularly organized state military forces or the troops of the United States may not associate as a military company or organization or parade in public with firearms in a municipality of the state.

(b) With the consent of the governor, students in an educational institution at which military science is a prescribed part of the course of instruction and soldiers honorably discharged from the service of the United States may drill and parade with firearms in public.

(c) This section does not prevent a parade by the active militia of another state as provided by law.

I remember a former JP in another county I worked in that sent a response to the "militiaman" that basically told the guy his response made no sense and to appear in court at the appointed time or a capias would issue.

After a couple of arrests due to failing to show up for court it appeared that, while this fella did not recognize the government, he did begin to recognize the government's handcuffs and the county jail. There were no problems after that.

If he isn't a citizen of Texas or the US then maybe just deport him to Cuba and see how he likes that!

Also it seems like that a state law preventing a parade with guns might come into conflict with this:

quote:

---

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

---

quote:

---

That does raise a good question: Why AM I doing this? I don't know, but it is entertaining me.

---

That's good enough reason

quote:

---

I had run-ins with several Republic of Texas/Posse types way back in my misdemeanor days. The Rev. Mel White was one in the early 90's, but he started his own insurance company. Problems arose in numerous jurisdictions across the country and Canada for poor Mel when folks starting having accidents and wanting settlements. Mel was HQ'd in Fort Bend and Harris Counties, but before it was over, he was prosecuted in many jurisdictions and Canada for insurance fraud. He received "many years" confinement. As I recall, Mel ran homemade cardboard license tags and inspection stickers on his car.

---

I also had run-ins w/Mel White during my days at the state insurance department. I recall that he made 2 big mistakes. One was running homemade license plates, which drew the attention of the Sugarland PD. The other, much bigger mistake was using a Canadian bank that cooperated with American authorities, instead of setting up offshore like the typical insurance crook.

If he wants to be his own country, treat him that way. If he chooses not to comply with our laws, we will invade his country with our armed forces and conquer him. If he wants to be a sovereign, then he will be treated like any other sovereign faced with the overwhelming force of a mightier nation (Compare him to Saddam Hussein, he'll like that). If he objects, let him air his grievance to the United Nations, and see how quickly real countries will recognize his sovereignty. I'm sure the UN will respond quickly to small developing (or not) nations who find themselves in jail in Texas.

quote:

---

Originally posted by AlexLayman:
If he isn't a citizen of Texas or the US then maybe just deport him to Cuba and see how he likes that!

Also it seems like that a state law preventing a parade with guns might come into conflict with this:

quote:

---

_Congress shall make no law_ respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or _abridging the_ freedom of speech, or of the press; or _the right of the people peaceably to assemble_, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

---

---

Except that if these are non-US citizens, then couldn't an unauthorized armed parade be viewed as a military invasion? Surely the Constitution does not mean that armed invaders have the right to march through our streets?

Perhaps if they invade peaceably?

quote:

---

Originally posted by AlexLayman:
Perhaps if they invade _peaceably_?

---

Curses! You're right! Another constitutional loophole for the enemies of democracy to use against us!

quote:

---

Originally posted by AlexLayman:
Perhaps if they invade _peaceably_?

---

A la Viva Max, for those old enough to remember that fine movie!