Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: United States Citizen vs State Citizen - what's the difference

  1. #1

    Default United States Citizen vs State Citizen - what's the difference

    If I have posted this in the incorrect place please change it accordingly. You can see I've been a member since 2009 and have done a lot trying to educate myself by doing quite a bit back reading. This is my 1st post lol

    What is the difference between bring a United State Citizen and a State Citizen? It's my understanding that once you quit your job ( leave the UNITED STATES corporation) and no longer a citizen of the UNITED STATS that any so called laws they have you have immunity to more or less. What I mean is you NOW have your constitutional rights and fall back to common law and if the police let's say stop you for not wearing a seat belt they can't give you a ticket. I'm well aware there is NO LAW in the first place that you have to wear your seat belt or even need a drivers license to TRAVEL freely .

    My thing is this

    What do I lose or gain by not being a UNITED STATES citizen?
    What do I lose or gain by bring a STATE citizen?

    And since I was born in New York and will become a Citizen of NY how does that effect me living in Texas?

    Furthermore I'd like FACTS not "I think" lol. I thinks don't hold up in court lol

    Thanks a bunch yall
    Last edited by larbec7; 02-08-2017 at 08:13 PM.



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2

    Default

    The only practical difference is the 14th Amendment. Prior to the 14th everyone was a citizen of their respective State, but after the 14th everyone became a citizen of the United States proper. In practice, this federalized a lot of policies that belong to the States exclusively. Remediation would be to amend the Constitution to strike the citizenship clause of the 14th Amendment and replace it with an explicit statement of State based citizenship.

  4. #3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by larbec7 View Post
    What I mean is you NOW have your constitutional rights and fall back to common law and if the police let's say stop you for not wearing a seat belt they can't give you a ticket. I'm well aware there is NO LAW in the first place that you have to wear your seat belt or even need a drivers license to TRAVEL freely .
    I'm not sure I fully understand your analogy but it's important to point out that you have rights, not constitutional rights. Also the constitution is a contract which all the states enter into. The states made a contract with each other and the creation out of that specific contract (which we call the constitution) formed the United States of America. Of course much has been perverted since then.

    As far as your citizenship is concerned, the states agreed in their contract with each other that the created entity (the federal government) would be in charge of a naturalization....but so long as your parents were citizens and they birthed you in the state of New York, you would not require that process.

    The states together, United if you will, realized there were some benefits to being joined in some respects but not all or not even most. As it relates to citizenship, you are a citizen of New York and with that comes your United States citizenship (because New York is in that same contract with the other states). This allows you to travel to Texas without showing your passport at the dozen or so state boarders you'd cross traveling to Texas. You may also trade good directly between the two states without tariffs. Further, these states United are a more powerful force against foreign attackers. If France attacks New York, Texas joins the fight with you. Notifying the globe that these states are United helps deter attackers upon any specific state.

    I do think its worth pointing out again, you have rights. Period. Those rights are yours even if the constitution was destroyed. Some of those rights are written in the contract to be explicitly clear, as a reminder, to the entity created (the federal government), as to the rights which were yours and everyone's even prior to the writing of that constitution.

  5. #4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TommyJeff View Post
    I'm not sure I fully understand your analogy but it's important to point out that you have rights, not constitutional rights. Also the constitution is a contract which all the states enter into. The states made a contract with each other and the creation out of that specific contract (which we call the constitution) formed the United States of America. Of course much has been perverted since then.

    As far as your citizenship is concerned, the states agreed in their contract with each other that the created entity (the federal government) would be in charge of a naturalization....but so long as your parents were citizens and they birthed you in the state of New York, you would not require that process.

    The states together, United if you will, realized there were some benefits to being joined in some respects but not all or not even most. As it relates to citizenship, you are a citizen of New York and with that comes your United States citizenship (because New York is in that same contract with the other states). This allows you to travel to Texas without showing your passport at the dozen or so state boarders you'd cross traveling to Texas. You may also trade good directly between the two states without tariffs. Further, these states United are a more powerful force against foreign attackers. If France attacks New York, Texas joins the fight with you. Notifying the globe that these states are United helps deter attackers upon any specific state.

    I do think its worth pointing out again, you have rights. Period. Those rights are yours even if the constitution was destroyed. Some of those rights are written in the contract to be explicitly clear, as a reminder, to the entity created (the federal government), as to the rights which were yours and everyone's even prior to the writing of that constitution.
    Trying to understand

    What rights do I have as a UNITED STATES citizen when we gave to all fall under their corporates policies and tried in a court f admiralty and Meritime law? If the police pull me say for speeding according to THEIR law and tricks me into a contract I have no rights. If I Plea the 5th , ask if I'm I'm bring detained and a, I free to go. Refuse to give him my license he has a couple if choices ....let me go or commit a crime himself by busting out my window , dragging me out of the car, kid napping me and torturing me. So, where are my rights?

    It's my "understanding" once I'm not part of UNITED STATES, he nor the courts have authority over me and they once again become public savants. My understanding is we have no rights and losing more every day,.

    This is why I'm looking for concrete evidence. No offense and no flames ( I'm trying to understand) your offering your opinion and I'm offering my understanding

  6. #5

    Default

    Then theres the Admirality Flag. Our standard Stars and Stripes Old Glory flag with Gold Fringe. Basically it means maratime or military occupation, but the result is that Military Law is applied in courtrooms where flags with gold fringe are displayed, not common law. This is the laws on the UNITED STATES



    MILITARY FLAG WITH THE GOLD FRINGE

    Martial Law Flag "Pursuant to 4 U.S.C. chapter 1, 1, 2, & 3; Executive Order 10834, August 21, 1959; 24 F.R.6865; a military flag is a flag that resembles the regular flag of the United States, except that it has a YELLOW FRINGE border on three sides. The President of the United States designates this deviation from the regular flag, by executive order, and in his capacity as Commander-in-Chief of the military. The placing of a fringe on the national flag, the dimensions of the flag and the arrangement of the stars in the union are matters of detail not controlled by statute, but are within the discretion of the President as Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy." 34 Ops. Atty. Gen. 83.

  7. #6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by larbec7 View Post
    Trying to understand

    What rights do I have as a UNITED STATES citizen when we gave to all fall under their corporates policies and tried in a court f admiralty and Meritime law? If the police pull me say for speeding according to THEIR law and tricks me into a contract I have no rights. If I Plea the 5th , ask if I'm I'm bring detained and a, I free to go. Refuse to give him my license he has a couple if choices ....let me go or commit a crime himself by busting out my window , dragging me out of the car, kid napping me and torturing me. So, where are my rights? What is your native language? Maybe someone here who speaks that language can better help you.

    It's
    my "understanding" once I'm not part of UNITED STATES, he nor the courts have authority over me and they once again become public savants. My understanding is we have no rights and losing more every day,. Wrong

    This is why I'm looking for concrete evidence. No offense and no flames ( I'm trying to understand) your offering your opinion and I'm offering my understanding
    You're mistaken, I offered fact.

  8. #7

    Default

    I speak English and you said I'm wtong. thats like saying your lady employer can write you up or fire you from your job

    AGSIN, where us evidence and FACTS either way

  9. #8

    Default

    OP's talking "freeman on the land" aka "sovereign citizen" type stuff.

    This legal quackery has been floating around the fringes of conservatism for a long time.

    It's essentially wishful thinking; they want the government to be a certain way, so they make-believe that the law says it actually is that way.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freemen_on_the_land

    "Freemen-on-the-land" are a loose group of individuals who believe in a conspiracy theory[1] that they are bound by statute laws only if they consent to those laws. They believe that they can therefore declare themselves independent of the government and the rule of law, holding that the only "true" law is their own interpretation of "common law".[2] Freemen are active in English-speaking countries: the United Kingdom, Ireland, Canada, the United States, Australia, and New Zealand.

    In the Canadian court case Meads v. Meads, Alberta Court of Queen's Bench Associate Chief Justice John D. Rooke used the phrase "Organised Pseudolegal Commercial Arguments" (OPCA) to describe the techniques and arguments used by freemen in court[3] describing them as frivolous and vexatious.[4][5][6] There is no recorded instance of freeman tactics being upheld in a court of law;[7] in refuting one by one each of the arguments used by Meads, Rooke concluded that "a decade of reported cases, many of which he refers to in his ruling, have failed to prove a single concept advanced by OPCA litigants."[8]

    Freemen-on-the-land are also called "Freemen-of-the-land" and the "Freemen movement". They may be an offshoot of the sovereign citizen movement.[9][10] The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) classifies sovereign citizen extremists as domestic terrorists, and states that these groups may refer to themselves as "freemen
    The wiki article's pretty good, too long to post in full but worth a read.

    A lot of good conservative/libertarian types get caught up in this (self-destructive) nonsense.

    It's a shame.



  10. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  11. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GunnyFreedom View Post
    The only practical difference is the 14th Amendment. Prior to the 14th everyone was a citizen of their respective State, but after the 14th everyone became a citizen of the United States proper. In practice, this federalized a lot of policies that belong to the States exclusively. Remediation would be to amend the Constitution to strike the citizenship clause of the 14th Amendment and replace it with an explicit statement of State based citizenship.

    Actually 14A created dual citizenship... "All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States AND of the State wherein they reside."


    Of course 14A wasn't actually ratified, so there is that.
    __________________________________________________ ________________
    "A politician will do almost anything to keep their job, even become a patriot" - Hearst



Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 14
    Last Post: 05-31-2012, 10:54 PM
  2. Michele Bachmann Citizen United ads tout Bachmann film
    By sailingaway in forum 2012 Presidential Election
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-23-2011, 01:04 AM
  3. Replies: 10
    Last Post: 11-19-2010, 12:13 AM
  4. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 03-02-2010, 07:19 AM
  5. State Citizen vs. U.S. citizen
    By DamianTV in forum Individual Rights Violations: Case Studies
    Replies: 84
    Last Post: 07-28-2008, 09:51 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •