John Hudson, "F.W. Maitland, Common Law and Civil Law" 

I am a common law lawyer in the United States. Where are you from?

@@sbnwnc Finland however I’m not lawyer but still in law school because I’m aiming for open university course route. Meaning once I either surpass entry exams or complete enough courses with good marks I can apply for degree -side which leads to actual lawyer degree. To put it simply we have mainly 2 ways to get into university (or 3 if you are borderline high IQ/gifted student this route is possible when you get highest remarks on matriculation exams) so most student has only these 2 options.

@@normaaliihminen722 That is very interesting. It is not difficult to become a lawyer in the United States and it is, I believe, even easier in Canada. What sort of law would you want to do? I work in landlord/tenant law, and I only represent tenants.

@@sbnwnc I’m interesting in family affairs like testaments and inheritance because those easily want to turn into mess like fighting/arguing but also leans to either tax law or constitutional law. Constitutional law particularly because it is in my limited understanding that parliament system needs to be either changed or removed. I lean more to checks and balances side because it strictly follows separation of powers unlike parliament which pushes that separation into shadows there is also this fact that lawyer also has to have good argumentative skills so there is that but that is just bonus of all that.

@@normaaliihminen722 Sounds good. Best of luck! Let me know how it goes 🙂

Check out our common law assent facebook.com/groups/therealpracticallawfuldissent

lawful refers to law of the land, or whatever you call it in the country you're from, legal refers to statutes, legislative law passed by parliament. we are all born with human rights that get violated by the state, as our parents are threatened with a fine if they don't register our legal fiction, from then on we are taught that we are the legal fiction, that is not the case. because all parties apart from the state in the trust agreement are unknowing and threatened, it is fraudulent and unlawful. legalese is fraudulent because they will only imply that they are using legalese when you confront them. "do u understand?", "no", "what do you not understand? i made myself very clear", "no i do not stand under your authority" so they will try and trick us until they know that you speak the language, hope this helped a bit, i can tell you've probably been doing you're own research anyway, hope you're getting on well with it.

@@roachitane right, it goes along with the maritime law correct? that is why courtrooms have you step through what looks to be a railing of a ship. with all of these 'audit the authority' type videos, when someone is asked by authority to provide ID... why not respond with, ''here are my fingertips or my irises, scan them.'' were we not given identification by our Creator already, so that we do not need to pay a fee to carry around a piece of plastic?

@@bw-mi9xp exactly, so the objective for the court is not for you to identify yourself, but for you to identify yourself as the legal fiction that shares a similar name to you, eg, Mr b w. thus you would present yourself as b w, the living man, for the courts that are forcing statutes, maritime law, cannot deal with men and women. the court is a corporation that makes contracts with other corporations. if a case were against you that broke the REAL law, none of this would matter, because they are here to provide justice, maritime law is a money making slave machine that revolves around contracts. after declaring yourself as bw the living man you should say you're not here as the defend, but as a guest to defend the rights of your legal fiction. a corporation is a dead fiction, it cannot give nor deny consent, that's why you say you own the legal fiction and you do not consent. you're not one in the same, but they'll have you believe otherwise. you are born with human rights that the state cannot strip from you unless you play under their system. remember if you were to leave there system as a whole by sending documents to heads of state corporations eg courts, dvla, nhs etc, you would no longer be a beneficiary of the state under the trust contract, pension, benefits and nhs fall under this sort of thing. trade off would be that you can hold youre own against statutes of parliament. there is no law that says your obliged to pay council tax, the government get all the tax they need from VAT and unwilling victims of statutes, but they are greedy, thus we are under unlawful modern slavery. sorry for such a long response.

smoke and mirrors gentleman. if you dont understand the nature of the underlying transaction and your role to play in their little ponzi scheme it matters not what you argue in their house you will lose

@@roachitane Try trust law. This is where it if you want to understand the injustice system. The slave was given legal rights which most judges trample on because of how they have been trained. The solictor/barristers work for the bar first, NOT the client.

And the medal goes to JCResDoc94

It's not your rights that is to be left alone. Rights are what others agree you deserve. You cite something from a book that you pulled out of one of your orifices, then I have my own too.