acts are not laws~questioning the police
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 29 сен 2024
- a friend of mine was stopped and searched by the police he did not concent to a search so they unlawfully detained him and took him to the police station for a search nothing was found as he is not a criminal and he was released without charge so he filed a complaint in regards to why he was detained. as he never got a reply about his complaint he took his camera to the police station to speak to the officer and ask what lawful authority (ACT) they detained him under.
![DDG & G Herbo - Nosey [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/I9Ra0Zc2NlQ/mqdefault.jpg)
You have a legal right to record absolutely anything if it involves you.
It is your right to have a witness.
it is your lawful right not you legal right. that right is given to you by the people not the government.
Haaa these public servants just DON'T LIKE being filmed !! And they defo don't like it when members of public know MORE THAN THEM haaaaaaaa !!
well done u kept calm and kept your cool well done 5 stars
u dealt with that like a real man
u are a freeman on the land in a common law country
Your mate is proper on the ball with his responses.
acts are legislation's passed in parliament, and is only given the force of law by the consent of the governed (us)
same as a statute, statutes are legally defined as legislated rules of society only given the force of law by the consent of the governed
This whole society works on hypocrisies, he lives by common law not statutes that we haven't consented to is there anything wrong with that?
@edjthompson Law is of course the product of a RIGHT, and is the means by which we protect a right; whereas a statute is a club rule that has been given 'force of law' by consent of the person who places themselves under it. I have rarely found a cop who understands the difference.
Good lad, thanks for sharing!
how can you legally not pay taxes?! if you have a signed birth certificate is there any way of getting your freedoms backs?
well done son
@edjthompson I think we should agree to disagree because you believe the state is all powerful I believe we are born free! And should stay free and most of us are brainwashed and conditioned to be slaves of the state. Its been interesting talkin to ya good bye and good luck.
hahahahahaha look at the video maker who is quoting all the stuff he has researched from the net
@badpanda84 Exactly
An Act of Parliament creates a new law or changes an existing law. An Act is a Bill approved by both the House of Commons and the House of Lords and formally agreed to by the reigning monarch (known as Royal Assent). Once implemented, an Act is law and applies to the UK as a whole or to specific areas of the country.
But quite a few acts in the UK are only enforcible with a signature or contractual consent.
A "voters registration form" for example is only enforcible with your consent via a signature. They just add scare tactics to forms for coercing the public into signing. Which in itself reveals what low-life criminals they are. They can't put a gun to your head and make you sign anything. And i think you know the name given to a nation which will require you to sign a form with a gun pointed at your head.
The Royal Assent or "Royal prerogative" are powers that need the consent of the queens signature. So who was it that gave the UK government permission to engage in the illegal war with Iraq, or the expulsion of 2000 indigenous people off Diego Garcia in the Chagos Archipelago to build an American military base?
A few out of touch people in parliament issuing arbitrary acts doesn't make the act correct or justified. The law is an ass and you know it.
Doesnt matter if you agree with it or not. You voted your local representative into parliament (if you didnt then you cant really have a say) and they create acts which turn into Laws if the Queen agrees with it. The Queen doesn't have to do what Celia Veston says. Everything is done on a majority (by the commons and the Lords) and that is how this country is governed. You dont like it?? Go live somewhere else Celia. Or perhaps wander into a voting booth if you can be bothered.
Power to the people take the fight to them
So he wants to live in society and take whatever he wants-pleasure,clothes,hospitals,pubs,internet & his Japanese phone but wont accept the rules when it suits him,utterly ridiculous.
I'm a freeman blah blah-well go and live in Alaska in the woods somewhere & be free.
Wally.
I thought this was very very good, good on you :) If you want to see corrupt policing, come up to West Yorkshire. The entire force is corrupt and it's one rule for them, one rule for us. Well done :D
The government doesn't give you clothes internet pleasure or phones, you work for those if that's what you want in life. The 'rules' you speak of are the ideas of a few and the majority never consented to it nor were they present when said 'rules' were created, these rules are just there to keep us in our place as corporate slaves. No one has claim to a piece of land so to say he should leave the country if he wants to be free is absurd, we can be free wherever we want to be. Peace
Black power to that even in england love that Comment and i am from the United States of America also known as north, central, and South America and the U.S.A.
@Danster82 everyone needs an ego or your a pushover if you got it boost it. as you see the officer comes out asserting authority aggressive with his hands so my friend was put on the defensive from the off. he was the one that was abused by the police and wants answers as to why they can do this. i feel that my friend has balls and helps people realize that we can ask questions of the police as to there actions after all they serve us the people. all he wanted is to no what law not act he break
one does not need ego to stand in honourable authority.
Have you received any further outcome/correspondence with the police?
KILLBILDERBURG err no. These pricks talk shite and learn their skill from RUclips... This idiot accused the police officer of working "under a false protest"...what ever that meant. Her referred to "law books"...what law books? Apparently he has spoken to solicitors AND lawyers....he knows his stuff apparently....lol
So no, I'd guess he got nowhere and is still spouting his shite about acts laws etc ..
Just hope one day when he needs the police that he remembers the disgraceful way he treated them.
Nch Croy have you ever needed the police? Through incompetence or just plain stupidity, the police put my life in danger.. I've supported them all my life, but today's police are not the 'protect and serve' constables we grew up with, the nwo way of things have created a quota driven 'detain and fine' regime..
it's easy to ridicule someone, when you're unaware of the facts.. but that just makes you look ignorant.
The entire law system relies on rules dictated in statute, and by theirs own rules, and 'act' is NOT a 'law', and is only enACTed by willful contrACT between two parties.
A simple example is the television licensing act.. with no contract/contact between yourself and TVL, there is no law broken and no compunction to comply with threats for monies
There's never an excuse for treating an other person badly, whatever their occupation 👍
i have heard some say that statues were created to 'codify common law' - so to take the basic commonly held principles of freedom and refine them into codes for particular situations to attempt to create a kind of homogenous 'justice for all'..
however, obviously that has not only not occurred, but is impossible, because every moment is unique.. the 'standardisation' of life will never succeed and only serves to create suffering.
often common law is described by those identifying as 'freemen' as being based around the essential requirements for harmonious living (supportive of free will) - that aims to protect free will by way of not limiting by way of regulations of any kind except where, essentially, harm or loss has been caused by one against another.
so in that sense, common law is not 'made by judiciary', since 'made by judiciary' still equates to 'made by one group of people for others' - thus is not 'common'.
can anyone demonstrate a link or document to any kind of 'law books' or government paperwork of some kind that states the relationship of common laws to statutes?
lots of people are speaking about this and as many sources contradict each other.
ultimately its all bs because we are all sovereign co-creators of reality and thus all such rules are arbitrary.. we simply need to re re-empower us with divine intent.
My brother Markus Bott had been tortured during 5.5 years by the German BND,the former GESTAPO.I recorded more than 100 videotapes which ended up in the legal system.My brother was tortured 1.5 years while several legal procedures pending.He was assassinated on July 11th 2009 because of our homepage and our book Der Totalitäre Staat.If my homepage disappears,the BND will have assassinated me as well.BND snitchers are thumbing me down
So thumbs up if you want the BND to stop torturing my parents
@supergeeek1. he gained alot the officers now know not abused there authority like they always do where we live. he gained his freedom cus now the same police dont look at him again or stop him for nothing so he gained peace of mind and some freedom. if your are interested in the freeman movement be happy that people are standing up for themselfs and you are not on your own. question everything that has power to govern you and ask who gave them the right to govern me. not me i govern myself.
There is a difference between act and law. Acts are generally limited with specific language. Such as in California, State of, the vehicle act, section 21052 restricts the act to a specific group of persons. By knowing the statutes of the acts and finding how and who they apply to eliminates the question if fraud.
@axel1655
yeah...think I'll make up a T-shirt that states"
"You're being filmed as we speak"
I say I'm sure to have a response. what kind? I do not know :)
Show this crimebodge.com.And P.A.P. POLICE ABUSING POWERS ON RUclips.ITS YOUR RIGHT TO RECORD THE POLICE.IN THE POLICE STATION AND IN PUBLIC.GOOD VIDEO
well done mate spread the word acts are nots laws
"an ACT is A legislative rule of society given the force of Law by consent of the governed"
no concent no force of law can be applied :)
a police officer is not a lawyer
No..BUT, you need to look real deep into certain laws and how they are worded. There are several city or county laws and ordinances that aren't legal under the state and federal laws. Most cops don't actually know the law that's why what your arrested for and what you get charged with later can vary widely. You can get arrested for something perfectly legal and the prosecutor will charge you with disorderly conduct or some other bullshit to try and make the cops look less ignorant.
Love it guys, law is substance, legal is equity.
The policy enforcers are not taugh to distinguish between the two.
Peace.
Once these secondary school kids think they have found somebody who is more criminally inclined them them they will never let up. The worst thing about their stupidity is they often mistake good people for bad ones, especially if that person is intelligent. When will we stop stupid people joining the force?
If you ant got legal person with you when you make a complaint, don't bother in the UK, the paper work go's in the bin, fact.
Good on ya!
Public servants shouldnt be able to use discretion on themselves (i.e im not giving u documentation to complain about your views) Film what and where u want! if they dont like it, then they should find a different job, simple as.
I didnt used to go out much because I was constantly harrased by police, I used to feel scared to go to the end of my road for being ruffed up abused!
Thanks policy enforcers! Nice to know that they are making the world a safer place
Having served in the police I'll be the first to admit that a police officers knowledge of law and acts is poor compared to a barrister. Many join the job and do not conduct any further research or personal development in relation to keeping their professional knowledge up to date especially after passing the probationary period. In vast majority of cases police officers become defensive when put under a microscope or on the back foot.
@007RoyalFlush The First Statute of Repeal was an Act of the Parliament of England (1 Mary, st. 2, c. 2), passed in the first Parliament of Mary I of England's reign, nullified all religious legislation passed under the previous monarch, the boy-King Edward VI, and the de facto rulers of that time, Edward Seymour, 1st Duke of Somerset, and John Dudley, 1st Duke of Northumberland.
@supergeeek1 its not about that that its about our elected officals giving resposibilities to people we call police officers to keep the peace and uphold the laws .the point of this is the law and peace are not upheld by these people as the corrupt the responsibility given to them and then use intimidation and violence to make you comply to their demands ,not the law of the land..i know this comment is 8 moons old but this distinction has to be made
Awesome stuff mate! educate them. I love the way they talk to us like little children whilst hiding! idiots! 'now i give you few minutes to think about what you ur doing and leave'. When it is so apparent you don't need to cos you know exactly what you're doing and saying, yet they do not have a clue and are ones who should think about what theire doing and go back to training...They are disgrace to their profession!
@Danster82 because evil prevails when good people do nothing ..what if we all went down to the police station at the same time ,..what could they do ..we out number them about 100000-1 ,but we dont want a "we have a bigger stick" approach as thats what they do we want them not to be corrupt and do their job honestly for the common good not for corporate profit...imo
if an act is law, why is it called an act and not called law? because it isnt law its an act. if it was law it wouldnt be called an act it should be called law.
lucky you had witnesses and a camera or you would have been shot and some bogus story made up about you attacking officers would have been told to everyone.
@gideon001 i applaued you on your comment about civil debate and the thanks you gave the person whom you where have the debate with .. clap clap clap
@Danster82 i applaued you on your comment about civil debate and the thanks you gave the person whom you where have the debate with .. clap clap clap
Yes this is SO true. Why is it everyone but them have figured this stuff out? Is the loss of perceived power really that terrible. Imagine public servants being public servants again. Imagine corporate governments gone forever. Imagine "peace officers" telling their private companies that write their pay checks to go fuck themselves and they are common law peace officers again. It starts with us. See this guy in Canada school a cop in a very nice way: David and Skytrain. ACCOUNTABLE
Yes, I think it's clear I'm talking semantics, but it's important that we clarify our terminology if discussion is to be possible.
I think what you, the freemen & gotknowledge1 (& I'm with you on this) are getting at is that the justice system often fails to accurately reflect basic moral principles & that by making "The Law" the preserve of a specialised class (lawyers, etc.) who use language as a smokescreen ("collateral damage"), the boundary between right & wrong has been blurred.
As far as I can tell, the difference between an act and a law is largely semantic - in other words, no real difference. There IS, however, a difference between Statutes (laws made by the executive, in this case Parliament) and Common Law (or Case Law, which is made by the judiciary and which is often referred to as legal precedent).
It would be great if a lawyer could clarify, but knowing them, they're unlikely to do so unless we all club together and pay them.
I agree with you, in my openion "gotknowledge1" honestly trying to educate himself, quite unusual way though, it is sincere suggestion that he should take all comments seriously and research about it before passing any remarks about it. As far as law's terminology concerns the ACT and LEGISLATION have same meaning while STATUTE is wider term to cover different sort of legal rules. In essence all of these terms have same effects and called law.
For starters let me teach you the basics because you have quite a broad misunderstanding. Act/Legislation/Statute are all words with identical definitions i.e. The Road Traffic Act can be referred to correctly as either an act, statute or legislation. Secondly, statutes and common law both come under the collective noun of "law", the difference in names is to distinguish the origin of the law, i.e. one is judge/monarch made, the other is parliamentary made. Understand?
@MrDonChorizo Let me break it down for you, primary school style, as that is clearly what you are in need of. Being treated as suspicious is not the same as being treated as guilty. We have agreed on a democracy, and that is why anyone can be Prime Minister - he's the head of the Government. The Queen has no real power, it's just a traditional idea, or rather something for you to moan at just for the sake of moaning. We have freedom, although admittedly there is no such thing as absolute freedom
@gotknowledge1 Your video description outlines your poor knowledge of the law. Firstly, if an officer has enough suspicion that someone is carrying something illegal, then he can search that person, regardless of consent. If that person makes it impractical for the search to be conducted there and then, he will be arrested where a search can be carried out forcibly. Secondly, the fact that an arrested person is found innocent does not make it an unlawful arrest. Learn the law please!
You all claim to only follow common law, yet you have all failed to actually study common law. Under the Magna Carta, only a baron can lawfully rebel. None of you are barons. You have also not researched "contempt to statute" under common law, which specifically creates an offence for not following an act of parliament. Also, under common law, a Police officer can outlaw you from all protections under law if you attempt to escape arrest, making it lawful to kill you. Still love common law?
@badpanda84 I must say I certainly am not a fan of the police as an organisation, (see my comments below) but it seems to me a lot of the "freemen of the land" go out to purposely wind the police up, which I dont agree with.
In my experience of the police they have never been there when i've needed them (i.e. when the threat of an assault has arisen or even after they've done fuck all) but a quick enough to hassle me over driving with a break light out or to search me for walking through an...
@wolf18179
1) You are swearing, which puts YOU in the wrong
2) Remember your OWN argument, the Police are a limited company therefore YOU ARE ON PRIVATE PROPERTY
It's pathetic that police or even that fool baldeagle should even go on about swearing, since when did words actually do any harm? I hate people & police when they threaten arrest for swearing, they're words for crying out loud and da same 2 filming anything. It's powers created to oppress. Police should be out catching real criminals
@baldeagle1962 I welcome all comments but your analysis is just out of context mate. 1) I did swear so wot its not like I was swearing at him so any1 that swears is auto in the wrong wot are u on about? 2)my argument is about acts an laws so y r u tryin 2 make it out 2 b about filmin on private property the issue came up but was irrelevant in the end. lol so any1 that goes into a police station and ask questions is protestin ur kind of thinkin does the freeman movement no favours at all.
@edjthompson Ok smart guy who gives statutes the force of law? Do I have the right not to consent? blacks 1 says acts/statutory instruments are given the FORCE OF LAW where in that does it say they are law? they need our consent and consent is deemed through action or inaction its a hidden fraud hidden in plain sight if you watch people getting away with it it has got nothin to do with technicality or lack of evidence I said common law is not legally binding.
@edjthompson Wow your doing a law degree! I do understand what your saying. if you watch my tv licence video you will see your wrong again because I have committed an offence which is only contrary to statutes and they cant do anything nothing lol. I can give you endless links to watch people breaking act/statute and get away with it. so its you that has to ask yourself if statutes are laws how and why are we getting away with it and putting it on utube to show people like yourself the truth?
@wolf18179
Don't get me wrong, I think it was very funny that you bamboozled the copper. He probably did the wisest thing and left you alone as you clearly had an agenda to either entrap him or make him look even more stupid. Props to you for not giving in. It is unfortunate that when we are born we somehow have auto-consented to laws of the country we live in. I just feel happy I was not born in China/Pakistan, where your actions could have lead to your death.
@wolf18179
Google first result "acts of parliament statute".
Basically born from 'bills', after acts have been implemented, they become part of Statue Law. In that link you'll see a statute law database that shows you all the acts that were incorporated into Law. The only thing that I think confuses us, and the police too is that there's not one big list of laws e.g.
Law 1 : Thout shall not kill!
They are all spread around silly acts to confuse and weaken us.
Any lawyers reading this?
@edjthompson On that point then, we happily disagree. I think of "rights" not as privileges granted by statute, but as a natural freedom, that cannot be morally prohibited or barred by another--not even a government. There is no public arena, save for those dealing closely with matters of national secrecy when pertaining to defense, that should bar filming. No courtroom, police station or place of public business. A police station is a place of employment, but it is not a private business.
So the human rights act is not enforceable? So why does everyone say they have freedom of speech, ' Its against my human rights etc '.. i'm confused? I know acts aren't laws but i thought the house of commons can pass an act that is agreed by the house of lords, then is agreed by the monarch.. and once all agreed makes it law which means you can be arrested etc? Have i missed something? :(
@gideon001 We must have opposite views of what it means to be responsible. Its not the police that see you as a child as they too operate under limited liability with the rest of the public its the creditors of the public that see you as a child.
If someone points a finger at you and accuses you of guilt and you react to it regardless of the facts of the accusation your reaction to it is the only thing that matters and is what the law observes, if you react with guilt you ARE guilty.
@gideon001 if you approach it with aggression you will be meet by aggression and that is simply the fulfilment of the law of this universe. Your entire state of mind is based on the fact that you are guilty and you have to defend yourself and show know weakness, you are full of weakness if you try and hide it.
The law is perfect and it only ever tries to determine if you are guilty the facts are on the moon, are you guilty for being alive?
Great Job mate clearly the Police do not know the law. Watch Albert Burgess at TPUC. When a copper refuses to log your complaint he is failing in his duty to serve you. You then take your complaint to the next level by asking to speak to his immediate superiour. Go all the way up to the Chief Constable and tell them you are reporting them to the nearest neighbouring police force.
I suggest you carry the Magna Carta with you and quote sections 39 and 45 ;)
What if my mother bore me on this land mass floating in the universe and there was a group of similar beings who decided to form a society. Would I have to live this existence under the rules of the other beings or would I be able to live this existence without. If you force me too I'm therefore enslaved. Do you think slavery is a good thing?????
@crisisofconsciousnes Legislative rule of society - A law issued by the Queen in Parliament. Force of Law - The enforcement of the law by law enforcement officers. Consent of the governed - The ability for the public to vote on who leads the law making decision process. Corporation?? Not really relevant.
An Act of Parliament creates a new law or changes an existing law. An Act is a Bill approved by both the House of Commons and the House of Lords and formally agreed to by the reigning monarch (known as Royal Assent). Once implemented, an Act is law and applies to the UK as a whole or to specific areas of the country.
I hope this helps.
Probably not the best way of settling affairs but I congratulate the respondent and the officer at law to have not let the situation denigrate into a Warner Bros style cloud of spit and feathers. Statutes are not LAW and a Freeman can utilise Natural and Common Law to not contract with these 'agents' in their merciless pursuit of private profit. Nuff said.
@baldeagle1962 I know you're lying, If you were indeed a law graduate would know that acts are laws and how the English legal system works, which you clearly don't. You would also know how much of a waste of time researching the Magna Carta is. It's a law which is rarely used if at all in today's modern society.
@edjthompson Lol that last reply was just weak check the facts hes got dates times names video plus the response from the court what court it is! he answers questions about it on his website I could go on and on. for you to just dismiss it as completely fabricated
just shows me and every1 how enslaved you are.
@gilesey3 I see where your coming from. but if he did lock me up for no reason my defence wouldn’t be to use any act! my defence would be that I didn’t commit any crime! Or consent to his actions. I have a question or to for you gilesay3 what is the difference between legal and lawful? Who gives statues/acts the force of law? Do I have the right not to consent to statues/acts?
"An Act of Parliament creates a new law or changes an existing law. An Act is a Bill approved by both the House of Commons and the House of Lords and formally agreed to by the reigning monarch (known as Royal Assent). Once implemented, an Act is law and applies to the UK as a whole or to specific areas of the country. "
I love it. Take that camera in there. You have every right. It is a place of public business, funded completely by public funds. What a bunch of little dictators. Police: be the public servant. Understand the rights of people that you serve, so that we can work together and maintain public peace and harmony.
The Human Rights Act 1998 states a police officer can stop and search you and seize any findings if there is reasonable justification for doing so. An Act will define within itself criterion which can be deemed unlawful. The publisher of this video has omitted to explain why he was taken to the station and seems to be rather obsessed with literal definitions.
Nice video... but in my humble opinion, your mistake is arguing with them. Does the boss argue with subordinates? No. The boss is King! Stop arguing with your 'public servants' and start acting 'as-King'... as-king questions! Get THEM to admit they have no bona-fide claim! 'I CONDITIONALLY ACCEPT THAT UPON PROOF OF CLAIM!'
The kind of Common Law that you and the Freemen are referring to is best and more generally referred to as "Natural Law", isn't it?
But you are quite correct, Common Law as identified by the Freemen is NOT the same thing as Common Law (case law, precedent) as described by the state.
The suggestion that police should only be stopping people who they know have broken the law is complete idiocy. Of course they should be able to stop people, even people who might have done nothing wrong, if it is likely to assist them in the detection or prevention of crime.
@badpanda84 I couldn't agree with you more. A police officer is always be given the opportunity to justify the amount of force he has used. The rule is that if he can justify it under the circumstances, then it's fine, regardless of the level of force actually used.
@edjthompson Lol im trying to be very serious. I disagree with 90% of the things you said surprise surprise! I tell you what edjthompson if you can explain this video away and not make me laugh ill be impressed?..... it wont let me post the link il send it in a message
@edjthompson I understand most of what you say but this is what I don’t get if you believe all statutes are laws then how can you at the same time believe your free? that’s just crazy to me because if the state was to carry out every act/statutes to the letter that’s not freedom not even close.
Law is of course the product of a RIGHT, and is the means by which we protect a right; whereas a statute is a club rule that has been given 'force of law' by consent of the person who places themselves under it. I have rarely found a cop who understands the difference.
from mike .
@edjthompson Law is of course the product of a RIGHT, and is the means by which we protect a right; whereas a statute is a club rule that has been given 'force of law' by consent of the person who places themselves under it. I have rarely found a cop who understands the difference.
@edjthompson Law is of course the product of a RIGHT, and is the means by which we protect a right; whereas a statute is a club rule that has been given 'force of law' by consent of the person who places themselves under it. I have rarely found a cop who understands the difference.
from mike 6291
acts are not laws...? An act is a source of law, a codification of rules approved by Parliament which establish the law - therefore, in layman's terms, an act is law. Police officers should have better legal training in order to avoid these smart arses using up police resources on nonsense.
i coppied the following i dont care how i get my knowledge as long as it is true. In the common law, theft is usually defined as Larceny "the unauthorised taking or use of someone else's property with the intent to deprive the owner or the person with rightful possession of that property or its use.
I'm sure "RUclips Viral, Career gone" is rifling through this chaps head...
good one! w/o camera this fella likely would have been drawn and quartered on site.
Think I'll glue my camera to my head and leave it there....natural evolution you know prectection of the self and all
lamo really good! 5*s!
This is too aggressive and it does not help the cause of the freeman movement in my opinion.
I just get the feeling that your looking to prove someone wrong with factual information in order to get a temporary ego boost when nothing right is coming from the heart.
This is utter tripe. The whole principle is a contradiction, since common law itself cites that Parliamentary acts are laws. You denounce a form of law in favour of another, which itself envokes the form of law you initially denounce. TOTAL NONSENSE.
@msadler100 It may have been passed while there was such a thing as Parliament, but Parliament did not have power to create law until the overthrow of Charles the first. This law was created by the monarch, therefore it is common law.
@vienacarva yeah, dont go looking to cause trouble, it's pathetic when people purposely antagonise the police... if they hassle you then by all mean exercise your right as a human being (not the human rights act, thats just laughable)
@badpanda84 Quite right, the justification for the use of force by a police officer should be subjective, and the level of force used versus the resistance offered should be open to interpretation. I sense sarcasm but I don't quite understand why
@Palafury Incorrect - A policeman and a police officer are one and the same thing. Acts are laws, as dictated by common law precedent and the magna carta. Although you can record, you cannot publicise that recording of ANYONE without their consent.
@wolf18179 lol were did u find that crap? statutes do need consent and are legally binding any1 will tell you that. common law is not legally binding and not subject to consent. common law is law of the land act/statutes are laws of the sea.
@baldeagle1962 I'm quite pleased that I managed to make you waste a large portion of your day looking though :-) My argument comes from pure common sense. To say that legislation is not law is nothing short of complete idiocy.
@EUROPEANDRIFTER- DO YOU MEAN POLICE OFFICERS . YOU CAN GET MORE THAN TWENTY IN ONE CELL JUST MAKE ONE THE BOSS AND THE REST WILL CRAWL UP HIS ARSE . UNLESS YOU HAVE A CAMERA THEN NONE OF THEM WILL WANT TO BE THE BOSS
i certainly would, theft comes under common law jurisdiction the police are there to serve and protect the public and there rights. you obviously do not understand the whole concept otherwise you wouldnt make that statement
Get some 'John Harris 1-5' on Google and RUclips down you, also check out 'meet your strawman' cartoon, seriously educate yourself - we need less people as sheep - it is for your own good.
That took guts my friend, you were right but most people would have been happy to get away and not be oppressed. Oh yeh,the disordely strategy is the police's favourite means off control.
@gideon001 takes more spine to meet aggression with non aggression. Go listen to some Gordon Hall from creditors in commerce for a truer understanding of how to deal with the law.
@gnowave The police have absolutely no need to know any of this rubbish, because aside from the fact that it's not relevent to their job in any way, it's complete nonsense.
@baldeagle1962 They are allowed to because they are the press. You are not the press. Read the Magna Carta (As you clearly haven't read it YOURSELF) and you will find it