I asked a young fellow, "Why are you in here?"

He said, "I'm in here because I've been convicted on a felony."

"A felony?" I asked, "What did you do?"

He said, "Well, I drove drunk."

"You drove drunk? What happened?" I asked.

"Last year, I was out driving drunk and the policeman caught me and took me over in front of the judge, and I plead guilty and that was one. Then six months later I went out and I did the same thing and that was two. Then about two months ago I was having a big party over at my apartment, and we were all drunk and having a good time, and we were making too much noise, and the police came up and recognized me and they said, 'Is that your car down there?'"

I said, "yeah."

They said, "It's parked a little close to a fire hydrant, go down there and move it.?"

So he went down to move it, and as soon as he started the car, they arrested him for drunk driving.

He fell within the statute, didn't he?

He had the driver's license. He was acting in privilege. He went down and started the motor. The statute says, " . . . in control of an automobile under the influence." So they arrested him.

Why did they do that? Did you need to be protected from that fellow?

No, they entrapped him because they need business.

You know, in our county it costs thirteen dollars and sixteen cents a day to keep a man in the county jail.

Now, while you're in this county jail, you're locked up in this room and there are ten other guys in there. Ten times thirteen-sixteen is a hundred and thirty dollars a day for that little tank. They have to feed you every day, and so they have these uniformed bell boys running up and down the halls and they bring you your food.

If they didn't have those beds filled with people, what would you need those jail guards running up and down the halls bringing their meals for, and guarding them? The jail guards would be unemployed if they did not have people inside those jails go guard. If the prison wasn't full of people, there wouldn't be any need for the guards, now would there?

Now I'm not telling you that there are not some bad people in jail. There's some people, I suppose, that need to be locked up.

But my guesstimate is that about ten or fifteen percent of the people that are in the jails here in Idaho are there because they are entrapped. They are not there because I need to be protected, or you need to be protected from them.

The guy that's driving down the road drunk . . . unless he runs into me and causes a damage, I don't have any beef with him.

Hasn't crime always grown by five percent a year?

Well, I was born in 1939, and all I know like Will Rodgers always said, is what I read in the papers. Here's the way this comes down.

From the earliest time that I can remember reading the paper, I can see where crime increases by a certain percentage. About five percent a year.

Isn't pretty much that way wherever you are; in Cleveland or Philadelphia or New York? That's the way it is here.

So, in order to combat that crime, what do the police department and the FBI and the officials that are in charge of crime prevention, and the people that deal in crime, what do they tell you?

"We need more police, more laws, and more money."

Now isn't that about what you hear in Cleveland, Philadelphia or wherever you are? Well, I don't know what they tell you there, but that's what they tell us here.

Here in Boise, Idaho, let's say we have a hundred policemen, and crime is at a level . . . let's call it level fifty, OK?

We want to reduce crime from level fifty to zero. We want no crime. We want every policeman, every sheriff, every lawyer, every judge in the state of Idaho unemployed. That's our goal. I want every single law enforcement officer off the payroll and out doing something that's productive. We want absolutely no crime whatsoever. We want every citizen obeying every law.

To do this, to achieve this goal, to combat and to curb crime, we're going to educate people in the schools and churches, we're going to educate them on television, and we're going to educate them in our jails, and we are going to convert everybody to one hundred percent obedience to all laws at all times without any exceptions whatsoever, and throw every law enforcement worker out of a job, in a certain period of time.

Alight. That's our goal.

To accomplish that, we've got to increase the police budget by five percent. So let's say we're spending ten million dollars a year, and increase that by five percent. We've got to increase our police force from one hundred to one hundred and five, so that's five percent. We have one thousand laws, so what we're going to do is increase the laws by five percent. That's so the police will have more tools with which to combat crime. And we're going to give them five percent more police cars.

Now, instead of a hundred policemen out there on the road, we've got a hundred and five.

Next we tell the policeman that in order to justify his job, he has to make, in an eight hour shift, four contacts with the public. In order for the guy to justify his job, doesn't he have to write four tickets, or doesn't he have to arrest four criminals, doesn't he have to do something to justify his job?

Now, doesn't that sound like we're creating crime?

Aren't we really, in fact, doing this: Every time we increase the budget by five percent, the police by five percent; aren't we really increasing crime by five percent?

Because if there are some real criminals out there who are bad types then we've got to have other issues like drunks on the road so that the policeman can have something to do.

Don't they have a vested interest in this the sheriffs and the jailers and all these law enforcement people? Don't they have a vested interest in trying to keep crime going?

You know, I don't want to pay seventy five thousand dollars to put somebody in prison for five years because he's drunk. Or because he's an alcoholic, because he's sick.

But for some reason, we've got it in our minds that that's what we've got to do. You know really, all I want to do is to be protected from criminals.

I don't need any policeman to protect me from criminals because I carry a gun.

I know that right away you're going to say, "Oh! He carries a gun."

That's right, our Founding Fathers understood crime. That's why the Second Amendment's in the Constitution.

The police cannot prevent crime. Tell me of one rape that the police ever prevented. Policemen catch rapists after they've committed the crime.

I'll tell you how to solve the rape problem. They did it down in Florida. They did it up in Minneapolis one time. What they did is they went on a campaign and started arming women.

I've said it a thousand times, and I'll say it again: "You put a twenty-five automatic in the purse of every woman in America and there will be no more rape."

That's the end of the argument.

One of two or three things has to happen.

Number one, the women kill all the rapists. If women killed all the rapists there wouldn't be any more rapes, would there? Isn't that logical?

If there's ten thousand rapists in America . . . I don't know how many there are, let's say there's ten thousand. If we killed all then thousand of them, there wouldn't be any more. If we killed five thousand of them, I'll bet the other five thousand would become reformed rapists and we wouldn't have any more rapes.

What we do is we disarm all the citizens. We tell them, "You've got to have a gun permit to carry this gun." We take all the guns away from the citizens.

Now the citizen can't protect himself, and the policemen is not there. How many rapists run out and say, "Officer, come on over. I'm gonna rape this woman and I want you here to catch me." When did that ever happen? I never saw that.

So rape goes up every year, and armed robbery goes up every year.

I remember down in Oakland, California, there was a liquor store owner down there. He had a gun and he killed three robbers; bang, bang, bang. He kept getting robbed all the time. He got a gun. He killed three. He's not getting robbed any more.

You know, there was some blood there for a while. And I'm sure that some of these ladies will shoot their feet off, and shoot their husbands, and have some accidents and there will be some blood and the bleeding hearts will come out and say, "My God, we've got to take all these guns away from people."

Well, the problem with people is that they don't know how to handle guns.

I'm not here on some kick to get you to arm yourself, because I don't really care. What I want to do in this segment is I'm trying to show you what crime is and I'm trying to show you what your status is. I'm trying to show you what the root cause of our problem is. And then as we progress with these lessons, how you go in on that courtroom floor and how you win every time. Because, if you are going to go in there and you are going to lose every time, then there is no advantage in going into the courtroom.

Citizens that go into the courtroom go in there in stark terror. I mean literally. The average guy going in to a traffic court, he says, "Uh, I want to plead guilty, you honor, with explanation. Let me tell you why I'm guilty and why I'm sorry and why this happened so you'll give me a twenty-five dollar fine instead of a thirty-five dollar fine."

Why doesn't he go in there and say, "I haven't committed any crime and I'm not going to plead to this. I am standing mute. If the government wants to spend two thousand dollars convicting me, then so be it."

"My attitude is, sir, that any crime that's important enough for my government to prosecute is important enough for me to defend."

Now, that's my attitude.

I carry a gun because I don't need policemen to protect me. I don't need to spend millions of dollars of tax money out here for people to drive up and down the streets with badges on their chests, and nifty uniforms, carrying guns on their hip, acting as hired guns.

I don't need any of that.

Why would I need it?

I dare you to come rob me.

I'll tell you one thing, robbing me could get real hazardous to your health.

If we had two hundred million red-blooded Americans all carrying a gun under their shirt, there wouldn't be any armed robberies. There wouldn't be any armed robbers!

The only reason you've got armed robbers is because you've got citizens that don't have guns and can't kill 'em. That's why you've got armed robbers.

You know there was a time, about 1900, I think every man in the country carried a gun. I came from a family . . . I can't remember a how many guns my dad had. He must have had ten or fifteen. I can't ever remember living in a house that didn't have a gun in it.

My house has got ten guns in it now.

You know, I talk to people all the time that not only don't have guns, are afraid of them.

I'm sitting there going, "You're afraid of a gun? Don't you know how to use one? Haven't you been in the army. Didn't they teach you in the army how to use a gun?"

People come back from the army and they don't have guns.

Women don't have guns. Women get raped all the time, they get abused all the time.

Well let me tell you . . . you know our Founding Fathers knew how to solve that problem and they wrote that right into your Constitution. Because that's a right, it's inalienable and it can't be taken away from you. You can give it up, you know you can give up a right but it cannot be taken away from you.

Now that's the difference between status at law and privilege under contract.

I would say that starting about 1900 we began to shift away from our natural unalienable rights. I remember falling into that syndrome about 1965, somebody got it in my head that the way to make money and be successful in life was to get into debt. Borrow money, pyramid, buy, sell, trade and become kind of a business man. Boy let me tell you all I had was misery the entire time. I was in debt and I was a slave and I was a servant and I paid taxes.

My government was after me constantly for not paying my taxes. Gosh I couldn't afford to pay my taxes. I could barely afford to keep ends meeting and I think that most of you all have the same problem.

Then one day I began to find out what was the root cause of my problem. Well the root cause of my problem was my status, I was a slave, a servant. I was in the Constitutional sense a subject and a member of society. Not a sovereign and a natural person who is a law maker instead of a law obeyer.

You know law has to be made for people who cannot govern themselves. You have to have rules for Toby when he's driving the horses to town. Don't whip the horses, don't speed, and stop for ladies as their crossing the road. Isn't that the rule for of the master concerning Toby the slave?

So the insurance company does that to us they say, don't you whip the horses in that car and drive over fifty -five because there's a possibility that you might cause an accident which would then make us liable and we'd have to pay these damages. You see where you're at. The master/servant relationship?

You know the root cause of our problem then is whether or not we're willing to be responsible for our actions. I think that's where the bottom line is. Most people want limited liability for debt. They want limited responsibility. And the insurance agents, boy let me tell you, they can't preach a sermon about well you know what'll happen to ya if you get in this accident, well you could lose your house, you could lose this you could lose that or one thing and another.

Well certainly you could.

Why don't you go out and learn how your courtroom works?

What's wrong with learning how to be a responsible person when you cause a damage, you have to pay for it.

But if you don't cause a damage, why should you be paying money into an insurance fund to cover the damages and the irresponsibilities of other people?

That's what the insurance fund is all about.

The insurance company pays out about five percent. So you pay ten million dollars in and they pay what...about five hundred thousand out. I think that's about what the ratio is.

Somebody once told me that the insurance companies pay out about five percent, and take the rest in as profit and commissions, etc.

I say "poppycock!" I can spend that money on myself just as well as they can. I don't need anybody to spend my money.

I was thirty-seven before I learned how to count. Once I learned how to count I fired my accountant. I try to encourage other people to learn how to count also.

In review, when you get in on that courtroom floor, and if you want common law rights, then you have to be responsible at the common law.

We're going to talk about the scene of the crime and we're going to get into the nitty-gritty. I'm going to show you classroom scenes here of arraignments, probable cause hearings, felonies, misdemeanors, traffic tickets. We're going to show you in detail how you go into the courtroom to learn that language. There's some words, terms, phrases; there's rules and regulations that you have to learn.

But, the way I see this, it's about the equivalent of learning how to fly. If you can learn how to fly an airplane, you can learn how to be a free common law man. You can learn courtroom strategy and procedure, you can learn how to get into that courtroom and demand your rights at the common law.

In order to do that, the first thing you have to do is change your status at law.

I'm going to show you how to win if you've got a driver's license. I'm going to show you that even if you're wrong, you can still win.

I don't recommend that. I'm not saying you should get on the wrong side of the issue and then go into the courtroom and win your case. I'm not telling people to go out a get drunk and then drive down the road and, even if you've got a driver's license, I'll show you how to win . . . although I can do that.

I've done it and I've demonstrated it for a long time, for about five years. We don't have any students here that have lost a case. Not a one.

Every graduate from this school knows how to win; because, he knows how to conduct the scene of the crime.

For instance in taxes: Do you know how many people the government's laying away every year on income tax evasion and willful failure to file a return, etc.?

I can teach you how to win those cases, but wouldn't it be better if you corrected your status and didn't even owe the tax.

You know, some years ago I dropped out of the income tax system and I've never even had an audit.

I go to audits all the time. I go with people that have tax problems that just want to make you cry. I mean they are attaching their property. Attaching their homes and leaving them with barely enough money . . . in some cases I don't even think they leave them with enough money to buy food, and they've got wives and children. I don't know how they can do it, how those government agents can do that. It makes you sad.

So, what I want to do, and I've told people this and I'm going to tell you now: You should start in, not with a drunk driving case that's coming to trial next week. Because if you're going to trial next week, and you are a novice, and you don't understand what you're doing, and you status is wrong, and you've got a driver's license and you've already made admissions and confessions, and they are going to use them against you, and you are on the video tape down at the police station, and you've made these confessions; its going to be tough. It's going to be awful hard for you to win.

What I like to see is a student who comes in and says, "Yeah, I'm a tax payer now but I want to stop paying taxes."

You get the deal set-up for next year. You go ahead a pay your taxes this year. You get rid of your checking accounts and your credit cards and your obligations. You start paying off your debts and you get clean with the world and then you drop out of the system in a logical systematic way and they don't even miss ya. You're just gone.

All of a sudden, from tax payer to non-tax payer, from paying twenty-five percent of your total productivity for your government to squander on Poland guaranteeing the Polish debt that your international bankers made.

Put the money in your sock, or buy gold or silver or do whatever you want with it. You don't have to send your money to Poland.

You don't have to pay your money out in property taxes. You don't have to pay that money unless you want to.

You don't have to have a driver's license. You don't have to be a slave to the traffic cop. You don't have to run down the road in fear and trepidation.

And judges understand law. You know, your Supreme Court understands law. The problem is that I don't believe a lot of the citizens out here understand the Constitution.

And the first building-block to becoming a sovereign is to get your status straight. Once you get that status squared around you're gong to find that about seventy-five percent of your legal problems are just going to evaporate and disappear.

Now that doesn't mean that the government isn't going to harass you. That they're not going to charge you falsely, because let me tell you that when you become a competent pro se litigant, and you become a what they call "Constitutionalist."

You go out here and jail and they call after you: "Hey, he's one of those Constitutionalists." I heard them say that the other day when they were booking me, or trying to book me.

"You mean you're not a Constitutionalist?"

The conversation broke right down. The cop didn't want to admit that he wasn't.

But, I'm one of those.

You know, they call me a Constitutionalist like I'm a Communist or a Nazi or a queer or a sex pervert or something. They have to hang a label on me.

Slaves are that way. They have to hang a label so they can identify you. They don't know what a free man looks like. They've never seen one before! And so they don't know what a free man is, and it's a strange and foreign doctrine to them, this thing of driving without a driver's license. Driving a car without license plates. Building a house without your government's permission. Holding something free and clear and absolute allodial free-hold fee simple. How many people do you know like that?

When I was a kid, there was a lot of them. But there's not very many of those any more. I'll bet you there's not but a million or two Americans left in the United States who aren't in debt.

Show me a farmer somewhere who isn't in hock. You know these farmers out here, they owe five hundred to seven hundred thousand to a million dollars.

I used to be in the cattle business. I remember, I used to be in debt back in the fifties and sixties. You know, it used to be, when I was a young man, the objective was: You borrowed thirty thousand for production credit and you tried to bet it paid off within the terms of your first lease and you were free and clear and you were out making money.

Something's happened. You know, our land is mortgaged to the government. I don't know if there's very much land . . . I'll bet you not only does the government own over a third of all America well they claim to, but that's another subject matter but I'll bet you that the government probably owns ninety percent of all the land in America.

We like to think of ourselves as property owners. Why, we're not a nation of property owners. We're a nation of people who are indentured in feudal serfdom. We've done it to ourselves voluntarily. We have voluntarily taken on this debt and squandered it.

Look at the national debt. Look at our mortgages. Look at our local debt and our government debt. Nobody complains about debt. Why, people have been led to believe that debt is wonderful and good.

Let me tell you, debt it slavery. It's just that simple.

Debt is slavery in Scripture. Debt is slavery in practical every-day application. Debt is slavery in law.

When you walk in on the courtroom floor, that judge assumes that you are a merchant and trader in equitable debt.

He doesn't assume you are a free man walking in there demanding your common law rights. He assumes you are a merchant in trade or in equity that has an equitable interest in some piece of property or some issue, and you're coming into the courtroom to throw yourself on the mercy of the court to have them decide how to divide up you marriage.

Have you ever seen a divorce at common law?

Show me a divorce with a jury. Have you ever seen one of those? Well, you're starting to see one or two, once in a while. They're called "palimony" suits.

You know when this fellow Lee Marvin broke up with his common law wife, you had a common law divorce. That is so strange and bizarre, so foreign, the news media picked that up and said, "Here's a milestone in law in America."

That's nothing new. That's the common law working. The woman had a right to what she claimed . . . absolute allodial free-hold right and claim at law to what his property was.

He's sittin' there going, "Well this can't be right. We weren't even married." Right? He said, "I'm not even married to her."

We've got people here that can get married without a marriage license. I just heard of one the other day. A young fellow went out with this lady and had this nice wedding. They couldn't get a preacher to come over there and marry them because you know preachers are licensed.

Do you want to talk about separation of church and state? Don't believe it for a minute. We don't have separation of church and state.

Government licenses all preachers! You show me a preacher in America that's not licensed by his government. I don't know of any. I'm not saying there aren't any. There's probably some of them out there. But as a general rule the churches are all corporate organizations.

Where do you get corporate privilege?

Well, from the government!

The churches are corporations and they are regulated by then by the government. All the preachers are licensed by the government. They're doing something that would otherwise be illegal.

Since when has it been illegal to be a preacher without the government's permission?

I don't claim to be a preacher, but I'll tell you one thing: I sure as Hell don't need my government's permission to tell me whether or not I can or can't be. I don't need my government's permission to do anything. I'm the sovereign, not the government.

When you learn to be the sovereign, then you can learn to be free.

When you go into a court in your county, you're going to find this to be true. The first time that you walk in there, those judges are going to be shocked out of their gourd when you walk in and demand all of your rights at law.

Watch this: "Your honor, I demand all of my rights at law, and I don't wave any of my rights at any time. I'm not coming in here to grovel before you, or to explain to you that I'm guilty. I'm here to tell you that no crime has been committed and I'm not going to plead to this cause of action. There is no cause of action before this court. Driving eighty miles an hour down the road is not against the law. I haven't broken any law. There's no corpus delicti. There's no loss to anybody involved here. There's no contract. There's no penal clause."

Well the poor judges are sitting back there and wondering what sort of foreign and bizarre behavior is this of this fool coming into this courtroom, who doesn't plead guilty.

Not one person in a hundred who goes into court and pleads not guilty.

If you took a hundred people who plead not guilty, there's not one of those in a hundred that could go in and competently argue his position at law. He goes in and argues, "Well, I didn't do the act."

What's he saying? He's saying, "Well, yeah I was driving the car and I've got the driver's license and the government commissioned me to go out there on that road, but I wasn't going eighty, I was only going sixty-five. I wasn't breaking the speed limit by twenty-five miles an hour, I was only breaking it by ten, and it's for that reason that I'm pleading not guilty."

He can't even shut up and keep his mouth shut. He's got to spill the beans and go into the courtroom and show the judge that he's guilty of doing something even if it isn't what he really did.

That's the problem that our citizenry has. In the last eights years we have moved from status to contract. We are all of us operating in equity.

We've got marriage licenses and so we have children that are owned by our government and controlled. Take your ten-year-old kid out of school and find out what your government does to you.

Start educating, training and teaching your own kids in your own home and find out what your government is going to say to you.

I'll bet you that you haven't got the nerve to go in there to that school and tell the principle, "I'm taking my kid out of school, dummy. I don't think you are doing good job here. I think I'll just take him home and teach him myself." Try that one.

Your government tells you when to come in and it tells you when to go out. It tells you when to get up and it tells you when to go to bed. You know that's true and I know that's true, we've all lived through it. We've all been raised, educated, taught and trained by the educational system. They taught you how to use the legislative and executive branches of government. They taught you that redress of grievance come by writing letters to the editor and picketing up and down at the state house to get redress of grievance, and writing letters to your congressman.

Poppycock! Balderdash! Bon phooey!

You get redress of grievance, if you are a free man, on the courtroom floor, by being a belligerent claimant in person and demanding it. You walk into that courtroom and you demand your rights. You don't go in there like a groveling slave named Toby to plead and beg and whine and wheedle before the master and say, "Oh please, massa. Don't beat me, don't whip me, massa."

Isn't that what a slave does?

He understands and recognizes the status. He isn't ignorant.

You know, we citizens of the United States think we're free, and we tell each other we're free, and we kid ourselves that we're free, and our government propagandizes and tells us that we're free.

But I'll tell you, the status of a free man is the man that doesn't have to show his driver's license to some officer on the road, to drive.

The status of a free man is a man that can work and earn a living and doesn't need a number or somebody's permission to work.

The free man is the man that educates his children at home or sends them to school, or to any school that he wants to, whether the government likes it or not.

A free man, then, having assumed full responsibility for his actions, acts as a matter of right, not as a matter of privilege.

Back to home page.