WelcomeUser Guide
ToSPrivacyCanary
DonateBugsLicense

©2025 Poal.co

1.4K

I am a living man with God given rights. I am not a human (which means monster) I am not a person (which means property) I am not the corporation that was made with my same name on my date of birth (SSID/Birth certificate)

If the law states "all person's...blah blah" and I file an affidavit stating I'm a living man and not a person, if there is no victim I have committed no crime. It would ten be up to the prosecutor to prove I am, in fact, not a living man, and/or I have no God given rights.

I am a living man with God given rights. I am not a human (which means monster) I am not a person (which means property) I am not the corporation that was made with my same name on my date of birth (SSID/Birth certificate) If the law states "all person's...blah blah" and I file an affidavit stating I'm a living man and not a person, if there is no victim I have committed no crime. It would ten be up to the prosecutor to prove I am, in fact, not a living man, and/or I have no God given rights.

(post is archived)

[–] 0 pt

The victim is the man or woman who is indiscriminately targeted and stolen from. Stolen property, stolen dignity, stolen physical comfort, and above all else stolen life. If I am driving with no seat belt, and an officer says "all person's must wear a seat belt it's the lawr!" I become the victim after facing extortion or kidnapping.

[–] 0 pt

Decent enough I guess but it sounds kind of iffy. I bring this up mainly because people are experts at twisting words and ideas around if they have motivation to do so.

What is or is not indiscriminate targeting is likely a thing subject to debate. Dignity and comfort are a matter of personal opinion. What is or is not theft can be debated as well. If one were to use them as standards there would be a lot to iron out. One would also need to ask what situations if any would exceptions be appropriate and why or why not.