Posted on 06/15/2013 3:34:35 PM PDT by Carbonsteel
The West Virginia eight-grader arrested and suspended over his National Rifle Association T-shirt with an image of a firearm is now facing a $500 fine and a year in jail.
A judge is allowing prosecutors to move forward with charging Jared Marcum, 14, with obstructing an officer, WOWK-TV reported.
(Excerpt) Read more at businessinsider.com ...
No they wont set it aside for they will be instructed to follow the rules and not know that part of jury work is nullification
NRA has some good attorneys. They need to hit them hard in the pocket books.
If I were this kid, I’d be sorely tempted to sorely tempted to take up serious weight-training for the next two years and, if I got strong enough to bench 300 lbs, I’d come back and break the principal’s bones.
I will say this once again, the North American progressives have not changed in 100 years. They are the same progressives that ran Nazi Germany and Communist Russia. They want to drain conservatives of all possible resources and eventually kill the conservatives that stand in their way.
They are at war with conservatives, even if conservatives cannot recognize it, and they want you dead.
They have not lost a grip on reality. They are actively trying to change the culture so that the culture becomes unfamiliar with guns, just as they have done everywhere else.
The judge in this case is a black robed terrorist!
We need to take names and go after them in the courts. The courts are part of the problem and on their side. The sooner we who “get” start to do “something” about it the sooner the problem will start to be solved
I’ve been saying that the battleground is everywhere there is a seat up for election, whether it be city, county, state, or Congress.
which side of you are you on
Sorry, but this does not make sense to me, unless you mean the basketball, tennis or racquetball courts.
Even so, that does not make sense to me.
I say lets send these folks a few "nice" letters to ceast and desist. Flood their faxes.
Next logical step after “Political crimes” is criminal punishment. Arrests, forced reeducation is already here, it is euphemistically referred to as “sensitivity training”.
Next step is incarceration for political crimes against the state.
Tipping point. The fact that our society has not reached the tipping point and openly rebelled should tell us that we are in very deep guano, with low odds of getting out.
If they are talking jail time, then they are trying him as an adult. Watch the judge try to narrow the jury’s scope and even come up with a directed verdict should the jury try to nullify. Insanity!
After Marcum was suspended from school, he returned to class wearing the exact same shirt, as did other students in a show of solidarity.
Kind of makes you feel a little better, eh? BUT... it seems the article is saying the teacher started the ruckus but the only the kid got in trouble.
Yup, I think he's got a case against the school and the cops. I hope he sues them personally (civil court).
Would be a totally different story if the T-Shirt did NOT have a huge picture of a gun on it.
I hear laments about common sense not being employed in school, but the lack of common sense has to at least be partially laid at the students feet here.
Yes, I expect to get blasted - for using common sense.
Richard James, McDonald is a state Citizen of California. Mr. McDonald is a former law enforcement officer who stumbled across this information quite by accident but felt compelled to investigate the issues related to law enforcement and status. Based on results of Mr. McDonald’s research, he took the extraordinary step of renouncing his “US citizenship”, (the reasons why should become clear to the reader as they review the information posted here), by reclaiming his “birth rights” and original political status, which by the way, is exactly the same as the Founding Fathers who were state Citizens, not “US citizens”.
Unbeknownst to most people, the class termed “US citizen” did not exist as a political status until 1866. It was a class and “political status” created for the newly freed slaves and did not apply to the people inhabiting the states of the union who were at that time state Citizens.
“On the other hand, there is a significant historical fact in all of this. Clearly, one of the purposes of the 13th and 14th Amendments and of the 1866 act and of section 1982 was to give the Negro citizenship. . .”
Jones v. Alfred H. Mayer Co. (1967), 379 F.2d 33, 43.
“The object of the 14th Amendment, as is well known, was to confer upon the colored race the right of citizenship.”
United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U. S. 649, 692.
Mr. McDonald is not a racist or bigot but merely wishes that the reader understands that the class of people identified as “US citizens” were the NEWLY FREED SLAVES ONLY as was the intent of the drafters of the so-called 14th Amendment. After their being recognized as people rather than “animate property”, they needed to be brought within the “naturalization process” and afforded some rights. As anyone well knows, property has no rights. Mr. McDonald has been educating people about these issues for over 25 years.
“We have in our political system a government of the United States and a government of each of the several States. Each one of these governments is distinct from the others, and each has citizens of it’s own...”
United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542 (1875)
“...he was not a citizen of the United States, he was a citizen and voter of the State,...” “One may be a citizen of a State an yet not a citizen of the United States”.
McDonel v. The State, 90 Ind. 320 (1883)
“That there is a citizenship of the United States and citizenship of a state,...”
Tashiro v. Jordan, 201 Cal. 236 (1927)
“A citizen of the United States is a citizen of the federal government ...”
Kitchens v. Steele, 112 F.Supp 383
The Importance Of state Citizenship
Why is this important? Because the visitor should know that the rules that apply to “US citizens” may be different that the rules that apply to “state Citizens”, and that the rights of one are not the same as the other. For example, the “state Citizen” is NOT required to have a driver license to legally use their car to go to the store to buy food or to attend their place of worship, the “US citizen” is required to have a license to do the same thing.
“The governments of the United States and of each state of the several states are distinct from one another. The rights of a citizen under one may be quite different from those which he has under the other”.
Colgate v. Harvey, 296 U.S. 404; 56 S.Ct. 252 (1935)
“There is a difference between privileges and immunities belonging to the citizens of the United States as such, and those belonging to the citizens of each state as such”.
Ruhstrat v. People, 57 N.E. 41 (1900)
“The rights and privileges, and immunities which the fourteenth constitutional amendment and Rev. St. section 1979 [U.S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1262], for its enforcement, were designated to protect, are such as belonging to citizens of the United States as such, and not as citizens of a state”.
Wadleigh v. Newhall 136 F. 941 (1905)
Mr. McDonald educates people about the reasons why this is the so and what they can do to reclaim their birth rights which are protected by the State Constitution.
“...rights of national citizenship as distinct from the fundamental or natural rights inherent in state citizenship”.
Madden v. Kentucky, 309 U.S. 83: 84 L.Ed. 590 (1940)
SUI JURIS. One who has all the rights to which a freemen is entitled; one who is not under the power of another, as a slave, a minor, and the like.
2. To make a valid contract, a person must, in general, be sui juris. Every one of full age is presumed to be sui juris. Story on Ag. p. 10.
Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 1856
INGENUI, civ. law. Those freemen who were born free. Vicat, vocab.
2. They were a class of freemen, distinguished from those who, born slaves, had afterwards legally obtained their freedom the latter were called at various periods, sometimes liberti, sometimes libertini. An unjust or illegal servitude did not prevent a man from being ingenuus.
Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 1856
JURIS ET DE JURE. A phrase employed to denote conclusive presumptions of law, which cannot be rebutted by evidence. The words signify of law and from law. Best on Presumption, Sec. 17.
Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 1856
What the visitor will find here is little known legal history about the people of this country that is not taught in the public schools nor for that matter in law school as part of the general curriculum.
Who came up with these asinine regulations?
Some kid points his finger and he’s tossed in a cell-block..., well it almost seems like it.
As you said, common sense is very uncommon.
I remember when this was a free country.
If they sent my 14 year old kid to jail for a year for wearing an NRA T shirt, I would go postal.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.