What is a Sovereign Citizen? Ask a DUI Defense Attorney 

Timestamps: What is a Sovereign Citizen? 2:18 How many are out there? 3:44 How to invoke Sovereign Citizen Status? 4:35 Why did the Sovereign Citizen come about? 5:36 What is the Sovereign Citizen’s central claim? 6:32 What is the problem with trying to assert a Sovereign Citizen status? 6:50 More problems with Contradictions: 9:25 History and Origins: 9:47 What options does a Sovereign Citizen have? 13:50 The CRITICAL PROBLEM with Sovereign Citizenry: 14:39 A philosophical look at Sovereign Citizenry: 16:04 ANOTHER SOLUTION and the reason Sovereign Citizenry exists: 18:44 What is left for the Sovereign Citizens that remain after we fix the system: 22:32

Addressing your comment about a sovereign society run amok with no laws: A sovereign with any brains would understand that if they follow “natural law” they cannot trample on the rights of others, right ceases to be a right if there is a victim. So, a truly sovereign person who claims to practice what they preach would subscribe to the concept of “live and let live”.

I want to address this question: "Huck:&Pippie Finnlongstocking​ Where would you begin as a lay person to becoming informed?" I want to start a series on my channel where I will create a MODERN civics class and teach Kentucky Law (which might bleed over to other states as well). Who would be interested in something like this?

I somewhat disagree with your comment on "if a group of people move to a piece of land not owned by a country, it would be the most dangerous place in the world ". If you get the right group, of like minded people, with the intent to build a responsible community, there is a chance that they do the right things and thrive. I think its possible......with the right people.

Statism : the belief that you require permission to be free

The United States is a corporation and Sovereign citizen is an oxymoron

The term "Sovereign citizen", is one, a highjack by the establishment and secondly, a true oxyMoron (with the capital M). Either you are Sovereign or you are a citizen. Sovereign means you live in the republic and are self governed, you hold no allegiance to no one but your family and God. Citizen mean subject, meaning you have a manmade authority. Either God is your authority or man. But, a sovereign citizen does not in no way exists. A remember, their are people that walk around that seem to evade or be above the law (people like the Rothchilds and Rockerfellers and so forth). They aren't in this position because of their money, they are in their position because they retained their own Sovereignty... If you are indigent (as described in the USC), then you can be a happy citizen, as you're considier indigent by being a citizen or you can be a Man or A Woman and stand on your own 2 feet...

I started watching videos of these goofballs and got interested about it. I could only find vague videos that didn't really cover all of it. I love that you covered all aspects of it even the philosophical view. Very informative and I appreciate the amount of research you did for all of us.

At 7 minutes he talks about citizens being able to choose to only follow the laws that they want to. That sounds exactly like the immune law enforcement, judges, attorneys and politicians. They get to play both sides of the system.

My father(born in 1951) taught me civics starting around 8 yrs old(born in 1988), so I knew more than i was taught in high school.and college by middle school. I am.not claiming to be a guru on Civics, just stating what a sad situation we have found ourselves in.

@The DUI Guy, thanks for chiming in on this. For quite some time now, I have wondered what you view is on this issue, but I think that I thought that you wouldn't be interested in this topic.

I would say 80% of lawyers are buddy buddy with the "machine"..

So pretty much a sovereign citizen is " Oonga Boonga me no like law."

"Evolved?" I'd argue our government has "devolved". Our basic rights have been trampled on. You alluded to civil asset forfeiture, which is wholly unconstitutional

Handsome fella 😀 I did my undergraduate paper on Sovereign Citizens. In law school now 😀

Hahaha. I never noticed it until you said it but you're right. That ceiling fan does look like those hats kids would wear back in the day that had those little spinner thing on top of it. LoL. Now that you mentioned it I can't stop staring at it

Lawyer needs a refresher on maritime law, common law, nature law.

OK, let me set the record straight on the origin of the term "Sovereign Citizen". I was a member of the Posse Comitatus in the late 60s while in college. It seems that I may be one of the few still living. I was anti- big federal govt because of the Viet Nam war, but I wasn't attracted to the campus Marxists. My membership was short-lived as I didn't agree with their bigotry and violence. The Posse believed, as most were taught in Civics, that the people of the US are the Sovereign. Thus, the individual is sovereign. The individual, being an inhabitant (citizen) of the US, was therefore a "Sovereign Citizen". So, the original meaning is NOT an oxymoron when you are defining a "citizen" as an "inhabitant" or "individual" in the US. The Posse did recognize govt authority - only at the county level. They were big on local govt. Since a county sheriff is elected by the people, he/she is the highest ranking law enforcement. Therefore, he/she can "deputize" the county inhabitants, as needed, into a "posse". Those were some of their political beliefs. I hope this clarifies where the term came from and what it originally meant. Btw, I became a Constitutional Law attorney over 40 years ago and am now semi-retired.

Hume makes a compelling argument. Humans are not reptiles that hatch from eggs and then proceed to fend for themselves. The survival strategy of humans is to rely upon social support until which times we might attempt to fend for ourselves within a social context. Hobbe's even concedes this. "All must live in constant fear of loss or violence" This establishes that there are no sovereign rights in nature. All are equally subjugated to have any rights they might think are bestowed upon them to be infringe during the course of nature. Rights, therefore, are not fundamentally inalienable. Lest some reckoning of rights takes place outside of the natural world.

I used to work for my country's government as a technical advisor in Trade and Customs negotiation. This was the period after the collapse of the USSR and ending of communist government in Eastern Europe. An American international law specialist was at one and like the other "specialist" we sat outside in a canteen waiting to answer questions from the negotiators in the meetings. He told us all funny stories one of which was about Sovereign Citizens. The origin he gave was the period 1875- 1895 and one particular white woman who invented a spurious legal claim. It was that there were two types of American citizen. The real ones and so called 14th Amendment Citizens. She then lumped all those undesirable to her and other white supremacists in to the 14th Amendment citizen class. The federal government she claimed only had authority ( ughffowaatey = in white supremacists speak ) over blacks, indians, foreigners( thum thaar ffuurnahs ), Jews, etc. Her reasoning was that black people were all slaves and the federal US government had taken possession of them as a result of the recent " misunderstanding and unpleasantness between the states ". Any one she felt who was not born a white Christian American was not a real American and should be considered Chattel of the Federal US Government just like the black people. From that she extended that federal laws were against the basic freedoms of the Constitution and only Common Law was legitimate. So any Federal Laws that like he so called 14th Amendment Citizens to vote or hold office were illegitimate. From there it was a short jumped to not paying taxes, duties or allowing Black people and Jews to own property or do business. She might not have called herself a Sov but she seems close as well as a typical Segregationist white Southern American. The kind who built all those ugly annoying statues. We were all mostly Eastern Europeans and had just lived through Communist government where crackpot legallese was acted out in real life.

Funny how they don't believe they are subject to US laws, but they cite the US Constitution

Boy in love being talked to like I'm listening to closing arguments...keep it up

Very well-prepared, thought out opinion. I like that you looked at it from both sides. Your ultimate solution of fixing the criminal justice system is a great idea. Not to be co fused with defunding the police. Simply citizens concerns and high-ranking and even legislative action. I am definitely pro-police (and yes I’ve had some not-very-pleasant encounters). One of the things you mentioned was fairness. I don’t agree with asset seizures in drug busts (unless you’ve taken down one heck of a large organization. That’s one thing I think is a gray area and should be fixed. Sentencing and solitary confinement make me question certain laws in the department of prisons. If all Americans could have their concerns heard and legislation implemented that would be a good starting point. You’re a very bright man. I am an optimist by nature but the Sov cits that I see have very deep seated “dislike” of law enforcement. That should perhaps be addressed as well. Anyway, great video and here is to hoping that maybe people can feel heard and we can be more alike than different. 🙏💕

Don’t forget, The, “United States”, is also an entity. Hooven v Evatt, a US Supreme Court case, described that the term, “United States”, has more than one legal meaning depending on how it’s used. I’m not a lawyer and even I knew that. Also the term sovereign citizen doesn’t even exist in any law dictionary that I’ve researched. Blacks, Ballentines, Bouviers, black stones etc.

This leads up to “just let the attorneys handle it”…..and in most cases, most people probably should. But this guy still doesnt know what the definition of a sovereign citizen is- its an oxymoron. Citizens are public servants. The “people” are all sovereign, because they created government. Government are the citizens. Citi=municipal, zen= to serve. A public servant. Some points are good though. We created gov with a purpose. we just need to slap them back into their Constitutional box, and keep them there.

My beef with sovereign citizens is that the position is transparently one of bad faith. Every interaction I’ve heard with one has them claiming they enjoy the benefits of a citizen of the nation and the state, but hold none of the obligations.

Have always tried to wrap my head around this. If you are born American, or of any other nationality, living or just visiting, aren’t ALL our laws and rights extended to you? So unless you have diplomatic immunity what makes anyone think they are outside American laws IN America?

Your own argument is rife with contradictions. Firstly the term "Sovereign Citizen" is an oxymoron. Nobody in the freedom movement would ever claim to be such. Today's governments (mostly) are in de facto possession of the sovereign powers of the nations. A corporate governance is not a dejure and lawful one. They rule by threat and intimidation. That IS the definition of terrorism. "Terrorism ~ the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, in the pursuit of political aims". When our entire lives are regulated by legal fictions, which are fraud with us consent, and then enforced by threat of a gun or incarceration.. they cannot claim to be "free nations" or countries.. yet here we are. Most American governments do not even follow their founding principals of upholding and preserving freedom yet do the exact opposite. Write legislation in direct contravention to constitutions which renders them without force of affect.. yet they enforce them once again by tyranny. The slow degrade of freedoms and the generational dissolution of rights and liberty, the over reaching and ever growing governmental powers speak for themselves.

Thanks for this. I have a friend who keeps talking about"the assembly" here on Kentucky. When I inquire about it, it sounds very similar to this. I'm trying to understand what this is but I never get any real answers. Most of the answers I get regard to maritime laws and that people have values assessed to them. It's hard to find a base ideology.

You should focus on their "right to travel" claims and the documentation they use when they get pulled over. Why do they always ask for the officers Bond number? why do they say there isn't an injured party? Etc.

Thank you for the in-depth explaination, perspectives & potential solutions to the problems.

Alright Mister DUI Attorney, if you look up Hale v Henkel a individual and corporation are different, and the individual can stand on his rights and a corporation can't. By biological definition, must have a an arm, a leg, a heart beat, and a few things to be alive. The term sovereign citizen is a oxymoron like yourself. Article 6 sec 2 of the Constitution is pretty well for yourself.

We did not all collectively agree to the laws. They were decided by others. We were never included. Systemite

You claim that a society of free people would be chaos... and dangerous.. yet most who believe in the ideals of freedom are by nature, non violent and adhear to non violation principals.

It doesn't matter if we have better lawyers but the lawyers down in this small town I live in they all say they still got to work down there so it doesn't matter if you're innocent or not it's whatever the judge of prosecutor want to do to you is what they're going to allow they won't fight for you don't matter if you're innocent because the problem is now that they get paid every year that someone sits in one of those beds so if we continue to go down this path then three quarters of the American population will become criminals of some sort. And when they see treason afoot like they have with the bushes the clintons the Obama and they see what has transpired they these two legal wars that have caused the deaths of millions the suffering of millions has left so many homeless veterans on American streets the VA systems are corrupt when all reality it wasn't some people in Afghanistan or Iraq that attacked us it was the families that own these Banks that attacked us hence why all the gold was stolen out of the f****** the towers why have to employees called off that day why do you own the towers got trays of dollars for all the insurance my building 7 was never touched but yet can see the demo going off why the department in the Pentagon now said by the cruise missile was the same exact department investigating the 2.1 trillion dollars that went missing the day before why on 912 the flew out Osama bin Laden's whole damn family when air Force one was grounded what's by the way Herbert Walker Bush Senior and bin Laden's father was 50% co-owners of the stryker corporation! Why Hillary was under indictment but yet sit down with the head of the doj in the FBI how they have rigged the US elections time and time again how was the blowers have come out and stated look this is going on and boom been murdered the American people have eyes have brains they see what's going on they know it's not right you talk about checks and balances we're way past that the whole top tier of these institutions need to be cut these agencies need to be broken apart so there can be actual transparency and accountability that's why the people are pissed they've all begun in the middle class it has everyone says they're rich get richer and the poor get poorer the definition of insanity is doing the exact same action expecting a different outcome if hard work really got you wealthy I know hundreds of people that should be billionaires!

What he means by Sovereign Citizens is the Moors. Sovereign Citizens are Moors and they were here before Christopher Columbus arrived in America. Once he got to the Americas, Columbus records numerous examples of Muslims (Moors) already present. He commented on the gold that the natives had, which was made the same way, in the same alloy, as the Muslims (Moors) of West Africa did. Furthermore, Columbus records that the native word in that area for gold is guanin, which is very similar to the Mandinka word for gold, ghanin, which probably comes from the Arabic word for wealth, ghina’. The Moors settled in North America 🇺🇸 coming from Morocco also know as The Kingdom of Morocco. Shortly after Christopher Columbus arrived in America 🇺🇸 he and his companions enslaved, killed, and rapped the Native Americans as well as the Moors that were already present. Not only were Africans brought over here in ships from Africa, but they were also some here. Why do you think there were African statues found in North America when Columbus arrived? America then transitioned from The United Colonies to earning its independence on July 4th 1776. The U.S. then signs a peace treaty with Morocco 🇲🇦 in 1786. You claim that Sovereign Citizens can’t live in America because that would be a contradiction. However, The US Constitution recognizes that tribal nations are sovereign governments, just like Canada or California Hundreds of treaties, along with the Supreme Court, the President, and Congress, have repeatedly affirmed that tribal nations retain their inherent powers of self-government. So if Native Americans can have sovereignty and still live in America 🇺🇸 then why can’t the Moors? Sovereign Citizens (Moors) aren’t lawless human beings. Instead, they believe in in equal rights, non discrimination, and freedom. Just because you don’t agree with certain laws in the United States 🇺🇸 doesn’t make you a lawless human being. Also, no one is perfect.. so even though you may have some Sovereign Citizens (Moors) who create problems and are anti government that doesn’t mean that all are the same. If all American Politicians were honest and fair then America would be a safer place. Example, Ronald Regan flooded the streets with Cocaine. So does he represent all presidents? Or does he only mess up his reputation? Example, George Washington owned hundreds of slaves. So does he represent all presidents or does he only mess up his reputation? So for all the people saying if you don’t like the laws of the country then move, why didn’t your ancestors do that? They didn’t like the way of life that the indigenous people practiced so the stole, raped and killed. That being said, you all sound like Hippocrates.

Sovereign citizen is such a misnomer. You can't be a sovereign and a citizen which means a subject at the same time.

You're very optimistic about all this

Sheep: be like government bad. Patriots: say take a stand and fight back Sheep: beg government to save them from the patriots..

good information but some is incorrect. you can become a sovereign citizen and still live in the united states youd be following UCC "law""code" (whatever you want to call it) which would be enforced on you by the federal government because youre on their land. its hard to become sovereign and you have to surrender a lot but it can be done and you remain here and you would not be subject to state law or federal law only UCC you could also drive without a license (as long as your vehicle is not being used for commercial use) theres a lot to it. if any of you would like more information on this do better research hes reading off wiki and googles top picks. dig deep if you want the truth.

This is the first video i found to actually explain the legal, moral, and historical aspects of a Sovereign Citizen. Thank you. I like how much you go into the contradictions of how Sovereign Citizens are essentially calling themselves illegal immigrants

I think these people are missed labeled. First look at the definition of "sovereign". Sovereign is a different class of people than your regular class of citizen. Then look at the definition of "citizen". Now lets combine the two definitions to determine who falls under this definition. It is not the people who the government say it is.

I got a criminal justice degree (Indiana law) a few years ago, and never got such a good explanation of sovereign citizens. I love research and digging for the truth. So glad I found this video. How can anyone think they don't have to abide by the laws of our country? Even someone here from another country has to obey the law! If you don't like the laws, then do your civic duty and vote for change. No one has the right to deliberately and blatantly trample on my country.

Sovereign citizens peaked my interest a while ago and kinda like th DUI guy it just didn’t look feasible, like he said how do you keep society together? How could you build wealth? You couldn’t leave your property for fear of someone taking it, instead of fearing a government who could violate your rights, you’d have to fear every man of violating you and your rights

Thank you for this overview on Sovereign Citizenship. However, if I may play devil's advocate--and I am in no way a S.C.--there are some points you made about "lawlessness" if they were to have their own society. First, isn't that speculation to say that they wouldn't have their own basic laws? I don't believe they all think that murder and mayhem should be tolerated. Yet, I can see where this can go very wrong, quickly. Thanks again!

I had to deal with one today. "Your stealing my car, trespassing on my rights, extorting me for the machine, and I'm suing you for 4 million dollars" and it went on and on. You know the problem with this individual was they got in trouble once before and had the operators license suspended due to non payment of fines so out of desperation (imho) they decided to go at it as a work around. People that are in these types of situations are gullible to Internet advice stemming from boiler boards and forums. This person claimed they had "a right to travel" and that meant no infringements. Lol. 5150 I say, 5150...

We are fools to subject our selves to this rule as no other creature exists under such rule

Okay but Mr Lawyer man, I have a question: What if you don't want to be part of the country but work there? Kind of like an independent contractor? What can a person do to become that. And if there's no provision in the law for me, why should I follow the law (in that regard)? There has to be a way. Live in water? An Island as you said...but then the original country would still have jurisdiction over their body. That's what I wanna know. How can I divorce my body from the state but not from the country?

What I think would make a difference. If police officers had to carry their own insurance like doctors. I think that would weed out bad officers. If they violate peoples rights to many times. their insurance would not cover them. No insurance company would ensure them they would not be able to continue being a police officer. I also think if it individual is charged with a crime, and they Win there jury trial. The state should have to Refund their expenses for proving their innocence.

You remind me of one of my professors from last spring, he is a public defender and he spoke in a similar fashion and everything to you, and would 100% agree with your argument as well.

You all watch Carl Miller on RU-vid!!! THAT'S a start. do it if you love your country and what freedom you have left!!!

States, governments and people pick and choose the laws they wish to make and break. Speed limit is 55. If you go 56 and up, you choose to break the law. You should move out.

There are two different types of citizens; one is a US citizen, the other is a state Citizen... P.s This guy is an attorney you should hire him so he can re-present you

Yeah, "smell of Anarchy" That is a nice way to put it. In my subjective opinion, if I had to describe them in a sentence, I'd describe them as "a group of people who think they can do whatever they want and say whatever they want whenever they feel like it. Why? Because they can." I heard of the sovereign citizen movement thanks to Mister Metokur.

I loved the philosophical side.

Like KRS-1 said “there can be no justice on stolen land.” Half of these laws are arbitrary and don’t even hold any weight. It’s laughable at how pretentious America can be

I’m a deputy sheriff and appreciate the informative research. Very good job.

The big problems are not enough “Check and Balance”. Most officers and people don’t understand the differences between policy or policing rather than the constitution’s.

I would be very interested in your thoughts on the rap group the Insane Clown Posse's lawsuit vs the FBI. The case as far as ik was dismissed because the FBI basically stated that the "gang assessment" that their fans(juggalos) were on, was only on assessment and not a gang list. Although police across the country treated it as a gang list. Leading to police harassment/misconduct/rights violations, military discharge, loss of children to courts etc.

Sovereigns existed long before the 60’s haha. They wrote the constitution and that status lasted until the 16th amendment. Maybe it was popularized in the 60s but by no means invented then. We pay people big bucks to cherry pick legal terms for us. To fault somebody for doing that is just ridiculous. This guys paid to cherry pick legal information all the time. Nobody ever digests the entire scope of the law, they just pick what they think is relevant, or what others will accept as legit. The constitution was designed for interpretation. To act like it’s Mosaic law and unchanging and infallible goes against the Constitutions basic premise. To think that without our recently agreed upon laws (in this context, citizenship) we would have anarchy is about as sophisticated as telling children that God has a beard and sits on a throne on a cloud in the sky. “Lawlessness would reign free”? Sounds like something I would hear as a child in Sunday School. Some of this video is personal philosophy from an academic who’s career is supported only by collective agreement. Not by insightfulness, nor by new emergent phenomena induced by enforcement of order on the population. This is an ongoing global problem for humanity and these lawyers are going to fall behind the curve eventually.

Great explanation... this man actually seems to have a legitimate passion for justice... rare to see these days. I've had many lawyers take my money and do absolutely nothing. Keep up the good work 👍

Most sovereign citizens I've heard want the protection of society without the responsibility to that society. I personally feel that they can be free of the responsibilities but deserve no protection from said society. If one, as an adult, annoyed me enough to put a bullet in head, then the only charge I should face would be something like discharging a firearm within city limits or disturbing the peace.

I just want to say I imagine sovereign citizens as people who want to be left alone not as the ones who go and kill their neighbors. A country or sovereign citizens would more then likely have some code of conduct. A big argument which I agree with is without a victim there is no crime. Pure anarchy is impossible given human nature, a sovereign citizen wants personal freedom which means no more police state, no more illegal search and seizures, and no more guilty until proven innocent. Our police force has been militarized with the war on drugs, they kick in peaceful otherwise law-abiding citizens doors for a simply participating in black markets that shouldn’t be black but are black due to lobbyist money, corruption, and propaganda. In this day and age police officers are currently not our friends(for the most part) and I feel that is at heart of what drives the sovereign citizens search for the freedom this country was created for.

There are places in the continental US that are arguably outside the benefit of US infrastructure & protections as well as ignored by law & emergency services... Those who don't wanna grandstand in court, head out on The Mesa.

can I become a sovereign citizen for the case of avoiding “forced vaccines” if we come to that point??? Or how can one avoid forced vaccines if we come that point. My body my rights. Please help???

I am not watching this video, and before you people watch it too... check out who the real sovereigns are and you will be surprised... here I will help you: Under this "status sovereignty," states are deemed to be inherently entitled to sovereign rights like autonomy and equality, and to possess sovereign characteristics like "dignity," "respect," and "esteem." further note: states can kill anyone and be deemed innocent, states can get away with anything they want that is why most of the time you see certain states battleing the federal government... Pay close attention because these attorney's who take sh*t about sovereign citizens know nothing about sovereignty, they are attacking something that might look out of place to protect the sovereinty of the states.

"we agreed to these laws"..... I don't recall agreeing to anything.

Thanks for your thoughts. They seem honest, honorable, and to the point. I sympathize with sovereign citizen desires for freedom but can't understand their insistance on flaunting some laws but embracing other laws that benefit them.

A few things... You started out with; "SC's state they never agreed to..." Your VERY 1st argument was the need of laws "that we all agreed to..." That was the point, the lack of agreement. 2. I haven't seen any so-called SC's state/infer that they are anarchists. The biggest argument, I've seen, was the forcing free men out of COMMON/Conditional LAW into Commercial/Maritime laws (jurisdiction). And for the record non of us "agreed" to anything, fore parents might have, but we were never asked. Government makes rules/status & laws voted on by other people in government...NOT the people. Seatbelts, Street cameras, etc all laws not asked for by the majority of "the people" who supposedly sends/established, "government/representatives" to do our will. It's funny many of the people in the comments are bashing people cuz they have the audacity to want to be free on this planet.

freedom is this sir. Freedom is when an individual takes responsibility for their actions. This is why we don't have freedom in this land any longer to the degree that we used to enjoy. It is because people do not take responsibility for their own actions. So they justify making laws in order to try to regulate and govern the populist opinion of how they should act upon them it's our own fault.

They ask questions. Like if taxes are voluntary then why do you get punished for not filing or paying them?

The government does not own people because that would be slavery. What the government does own is account numbers like as SS#. That’s why the court needs a human person to take accountability for the legal fiction account number in court that the state does own. That’s why the script asks everyone if they speak a language of the land as well as if they understand the charges. The first question determines that if you speak the language of the land that you can comprehend that words can be spelt the same way and have completely different meanings. An example is the word capital because it can be used as a capital letter in comparison to lowercase letters like the legal fiction account numbers are all written in capital letters compared to birth names written in capital and lowercase letters in comparison to the word capital meaning currency, as well as the word capital meaning a capital offense. The second question asked if you understand the charges is scripted to gain jurisdiction given by free will as a verbal contract in open court with the expectation of the word understand defined as to stand underneath as in accept responsibility for the charges placed against the legal fiction person account number in comparison to comprehension of the charges placed against the legal fiction person. Since the state does not own the human being , the state owns the account number that the person is required to accept responsibility for. At least that’s what the Vatican people taught me in my special Driver improvement class. So a human being does have the right to not participate in an unfair trial against the legal fiction person that is owned by the state in violation of the four universal laws of do no damage to person, do no damage to property, do not be found in breach of contract ( verbal, nonverbal, or action) and do not disturb the peace of a civilized society. If you need further explanation I can be available for clarification.

I wanted to here facts. All i heard was one sided hearsay

Violence is no thing when people are able to communicate. So not agreed with the terms about the danger when living in separate island.

Respectfully, the argument is NOT that "I, a Sov. Cit., don't like a law, therefore I choose that it does not apply to me." No. The argument is that a State can craft all the laws it wants: the only laws I follow are ones that have authority to bind me---laws in conformity with Natural Law. I am not required to obey arbitrary laws some state rolled out on a scroll somewhere. I can choose to follow a man made law, but I am not required to. Or, I can refuse to comply with it as it is extrajudicial having no authority to bind me. Could you address the fundamental point? What authority does a Sovereign state have to enforce laws not in keeping with natural law? I didn't consent or contract to be bound, and my presence in a forum state is not grounds to be subject to arbitrary law.

What is sovereign according to biblical terms?

If Anarchy is defending the sovereignty bestowed upon us by our creator, then this country was founded by Anarchists.

Is Citizenship a Right or a Previliage?

Lol! The founding fathers who created the constitution started it bro.

I'm sorry, but so many things are wrong with what you're saying. It is not natural for us to be regulated by a governing body there was no government in the beginning of time. And in a civilized society people wouldn't be clubbing each other over the head. If you try to start a sovereign Society with a bunch of K people sure but that's obviously a bad idea people have to be educated and considerate and compassionate with each other. Hippies have done this in communes all the time and sure they have their differences but they figure it all out and there's no war. That idea of work is imposed by the government's to convince people that we need their regulation

Well done on such a thorough & informative video, you’ve clearly put a lot of time into preparing this video. Thank you 👏👏👏

You just described certain parts of our country. Las Angeles, Detroit, and New York come to mind.

Long before posse comitatus... this countries founding fathers were in fact sovereign... that's long after the fact the magna carta declared man his own king. Sui juris, of ones own rights. America isn't the u.s.(corporation). Political status differs. I love America, not the ever expanding, encroaching, and profit demanding government. Many laws(lores) existed hundreds and thousands of years before the u.s. govt was chartered(corp.). Fundamental law, universal(gods) law, even biblical and ecclesiastical law, far preceed man made(private) law. People vs persons. Private man operating as such, without governorship. Laws exist, common laws were already here well before private law was berthed. The term self governance and the ability to operate without external government(mind control) is the core of the ideas. You say "we all" voted on this or that. That's not true. We are owed a Republican form of govt., not a democracy! Democracy is mob rule, 51% say we get the kill or eat the other 49%(majority rule). What about pro per(propria persona) not pro se? I don't need to wear a mask. I can stand in my own stead and not need re-presented. Speaking for another man can only have ill effects and lead to misrepresentation eventually. Hence self governance, which we're supposedly able to do. But! It only happens when people are held fully accountable and are holding full liability for their actions. We are dumbed down and made to think it's always someone else fault, or someone else will pay the bill(personal insurance, private insurance, corporate shell games, bonding, bankruptcy). When man finally achieves his highest form and owns his deeds every action, we can be sovereign without FEAR of anarchy. The govt rules by fear, fear of being shot because a cop "thought he had a gun", fear of imprisonment from unconstitutional taxes, or anything immoral judged by others, etc. Debtors prisons aren't supposed to exist, yet we jail people daily for failure, or inability to pay. The govt creates scarcity and fear mongers people into low level thinking in order to control them easily. This scarcity leaves everyone fearing everything. Being broke(so ppl steal), having no jobs(so ppl steal/ hoard money/ covet thy neighbors wealth), everything is fear based mind control(govern mental). You know as well as i do, this is the origin of the idea and the reason it promulgates and is so well received by people who have been wronged for the greater good(communism), because "we all" said so(democracy/mob mentality). Gov't creates inequality, then exploits the shit out of everyone for being victim of the system that's supposed to benefit everyone(not just some as currently happens). We're all created equal.. that doesn't mean we all get the same chances or are treated the same, that's a simple fact of life sadly. I for one dislike hearing the term "spreading democracy" when we invade another sovereign territory/ country, and attempt to install something we don't even have ourselves! We are a loathsome govt entity, not of, not by, and certainly not FOR OUR PEOPLE! This is the gist of many Americans plights. Nothing to do with the fiction of sovereign citizens, which aren't real(just uninformed, pissed off americans). Like giant midgets, or good cops, they don't exist. Bring back the real peace officers please. Because good cops hang out with sovereign citizens, and tinkerbell in never never land, having tea with the easter bunny and tooth fairy.

Listen brother, the subconscious never lies…..

MINUTE MARK 7.20 "ON US SOIL ",PRAYTELL WHY DOES EVERY COURTROOM ACROSS AMERICA HAVE A GOLD FRINGED MARITIME ADMIRALTY FLAG FLAG IN THEM? A QUESTION THAT BEGS AN ANSWER.

The "sovereign citizens" seem to base their beliefs on a crude understanding of the "social contract" between the state and the citizens -- as if individuals have the right to opt out of the "contract". Bellarmine expressed well the nature of the "contract" by pointing out that government cannot exist permanently without the consent of the governed, because the people will inevitably overthrow a regime of tyrants. Regrettably, I can only paraphrase because I don't remember exactly where I read that, but I think it is in Volume 1 of De Romano Pontifice, where he treats on monarchy, aristocracy, and democracy, and the general principles of underlying all forms of government.

great video!

It appears very little people to no one look up the definitions of these words in black laws dictionary. This realm is dominated by commercial law, not natural law. One is not sovereign if they are a citizen. Sovereign men and woman are honourable people and cause no harm, no loss and no injury intentionally. Learn your inalienable rights and who u truly are family ❤

On "this sounds like anarchy" Nah, Anarchists understand that they're subject unto the law, they just assert that it's a tool of the state to maintain capital first and foremost. Anarchism is the political advocacy to reduce unjustified hierarchy to the greatest extent, this justification usually measured by a heiarchy's accountability, usually through the degree of democratic influence of its constituents. Afterall, anarchists assert that regional sovereignty is legitimised by the state's institutional monopoly on violence. So for example, though as an Australian socialist who sees the abolition of Her Majesty's Federal Commonwealth as a necessary part of progressing past capitalism, I understand that I am subject to the Crown's sovereignty and to the Australian and New South Welsh legislature. Sovereign citizens are in denial of that reality.

Instead of ad hominems why don't refute their claims? Does the constitution not allow for free travel? Is not the legal definition of a "driver" commercial in nature? Similarly is it not also true that all members of the bar their highest loyalty is to the court not their client? Just keep it real mate.

👋 Hi and thank you for posting this information and also sharing your views... it was truly helpful... definitely an Aha Moment, great job!

the government "touched" the people at waco texas?

When did we all agree upon the laws? We didn't all agree on them, we were indoctrinated to believe that "that's the way things are". I don't think they are devolving but protesting unjust laws. Just like speeding tickets. Most of the speeding tickets are just to generate revenue for the cities where nobody's harmed. What other reasons are there for having speeding tickets if nobody's injured?

8:33 Maritime law apllies on all navigable waterways. Navigable meaning able to travel from one area to another. A small lake doesn't count.

Sovereign Citizens are people who want things both ways. They want the protections of the Constitution without having to follow any of the laws promulgated by it. They want the police to follow laws and procedures, but the Citizens get to ignore them and the laws they enforce. It boils down to "Rules for thee, but not for me." It also comes down to they have special knowledge that no one else does, and if they say the right incantations to the right people, they can collect on billions the Federal Reserve has put on their name. Or they can get out of getting drivers licenses or paying car registration. They live in Fantasyland, where unicorns fart rainbows.

You should talk about the moors. They don’t recognize their defeat centuries ago. They still think that they gave autorisation to the USA to make business on their land. They steal houses pretending that they don’t need permission because on their land they called. Ho, when you said streets would be dirty, well that is odd. Sovcits allow themselves to drive on the trees and roads paid by tax payer but don’t want to be part of it by refusing to register their cars and pay for drivers licence an been insured. I don’t think that they would buy any streets or roads if they don’t want to pay their taxes.

I believe you should be a sovereign citizen if you are going to be making videos of the topic.

None of this information is fact

You have to have these three requirements to be a sovereign citizen 1: a DUI 2: a low Iq 3:a ged

Just subbed you recently you are a great educator. You asked what we thought about sovereign citizens. I think that it only makes sense that if they don’t want to follow the laws of the land than they need to leave that land. If there are laws that you don’t like than work to change that law the legal way you can’t just decide I’m not going to follow that law. You must follow the law until you are able to change it. Laws are meant to change and I think they don’t change as much as they should. We stick with a law even when it no longer makes sense to do so. But if you look at history even the prohibition of alcohol was changed and it was done so as a better to all who live here because the prohibition of it grew more problems than just allowing it to be. If something doesn’t work don’t stick with it find a different way. We don’t do that when it comes to laws. I see if the law isn’t working that we tighten the law hoping that will change the behaviors. Who know maybe that’s the right way maybe not but to not try different way is the real wrong. That’s how our country came to be. We tried a different way. And made laws to support our new way.