Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Some CRITICAL DEFINITIONS people should UNDERSTAND

Expand Messages
  • Patrick McKEE
    Here are a few of the most CRITICAL DEFINITIONS that I CONTINUALLY see people in the SO-CALLED “patriot community” totally MISUNDERSTAND & ABUSE.
    Message 1 of 1 , Mar 23, 2010
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment

      Here are a few of the most CRITICAL DEFINITIONS that I CONTINUALLY see people in the SO-CALLED “patriot community” totally MISUNDERSTAND & ABUSE.

       

      INDIVIDUAL - 1 obsolete : INSEPARABLE, 2 a : of, relating to, or distinctively associated with an individual <an individual effort> b : being an individual or existing as an indivisible whole c : intended for one person <an individual serving>, 3 : existing as a distinct entity : SEPARATE, 4 : having marked individuality <an individual style>, synonyms see SPECIAL, CHARACTERISTIC

      http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/INDIVIDUAL

       

      REQUIREMENT - something required: a : something wanted or needed : necessity <production was not sufficient to satisfy military requirements> b : something essential to the existence or occurrence of something else : condition <failed to meet the school's requirements for graduation>

      http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/requirement

      REQUIRE - 1 a : to claim or ask for by right and authority b archaic : request, 2 a : to call for as suitable or appropriate <the occasion requires formal dress> b : to demand as necessary or essential : have a compelling need for <all living beings require food>, 3 : to impose a compulsion or command on : compel, 4 chiefly British : to feel or be obliged —used with a following infinitive <one does not require to be a specialist — Elizabeth Bowen>

      http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/required

      JURISDICTION - 1: the power, right, or authority to interpret and apply the law, 2 a : the authority of a sovereign power to govern or legislate b : the power or right to exercise authority : control, 3 : the limits or territory within which authority may be exercised

      http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Jurisdiction  

       

      JURISDICTION. The power and authority constitutionally conferred upon (or constitutionally recognized as existing in) a court or judge to pronounce the sentence of the law, or to award the remedies provided by law, upon a state of facts, proved or admitted, referred to the tribunal for decision, and authorized by law to be the subject of investigation or action by that tribunal, and in favor or against persons (or a res) who present themselves, or who are brought, before the court in some manner sanctioned by law as proper and sufficient. 1 Black, Judgm. § 215. And see Nenno v. Railroad Co., 105 Mo. App. 540, 80 S. W. 24 ; Ingram v. Fuson, 118 Ky. 882, 82 5. W. 606; Tod v. Crisman, 123 Iowa, 693, 99 N. W. 686; Harrigan v. Gilchrist, 121 Wis. 127, 99 N. W. 909 ; Wightman v. Karsner, 20 Ala. 451; Reynolds v. Stockton, 140 U. S. 254, 11 Sup. Ct. 773, 35 L. Ed. 464; Templeton v. Ferguson , 89 Tex.

      47, 33 S. W. 329 ; Succession of Weigel, 17 La. Ann. 70.

        Jurisdiction is a power constitutionally conferred upon a judge or magistrate to take cognizance of and determine causes according to law, and to carry his sentence into execution. U. S. v. Arredondo, 6 Pet. 691, 8 L. Ed. 547 ; Yates v. Lansing, 9 Johns.(N. Y.) 413, 6 Am. Dec. 290; Johnson v. Jones, 2 Neb. 135.

        The authority of a court as distinguished from the other departments; judicial power considered with reference to its scope and extent as respects the questions and persons subject to it; power given by law to hear and decide controversies. Abbott.

      Jurisdiction is the power to hear and determine the subject-matter in controversy between parties to the suit; to adjudicate or exercise any judicial power over them. Rhode Island v. Massachusetts , 12 Pet. 657, 717, 9 L. Ed. 1233.

        Jurisdiction is the power to hear and determine a cause; the authority by which judicial officers take cognizance of and decide causes. Brownsville v. Basse, 43 Tex. 440. [rest omitted]

      BLACK'S LAW DICTIONARY, 2ND EDITION, page 673

       

      LIABLE. 1. Bound or obliged in law or equity; responsible; chargeable; answerable; compellable to make satisfaction, compensation, or restitution.

        2. Exposed or subject to a given contingency, risk, or casualty, which is more or less probable.

      —Limited liability. The liability of the members of a joint-stock company may be either unlimited or limited; and, if the latter, then the limitation of liability is either the amount, if any, unpaid on the shares, (in which case the limit is said to be "by shares,") or such an amount as the members guaranty in the event of the company being wound up, (in which case the limit is said to be "by guaranty.") Brown.—Personal liability. The liability of the stockholders in corporations, under certain statutes, by which they may 'be held individually responsible for the debts of the corporation, either to the extent of the par value of their respective holdings of stock, or to twice that amount, or without limit, or otherwise, as the particular statute directs.

      BLACK'S LAW DICTIONARY, 2ND EDITION, page 719

       

      SUBJECT. In logic. That concerning which the affirmation in a proposition is made ; the first word in a proposition.

        An individual matter considered as the object of legislation. The constitutions of several of the states require that emery act of the legislature shall relate to but one subject, which shall be expressed in the title of the statute. See Ex parte Thomas, 113 Ala. 1, 21 South. 369 ; In re Mayer, 50 N. Y. 504; State v. County Treasurer , 4 S. C. 528 ; Johnson v. Harrison, 47 Minn. 577, 50 N. W. 923, 28 Am. St. Rep. 382.

        In constitutional law. One that owes allegiance to a sovereign and is governed by his laws. The natives of Great Britain are subjects of the British government. Men in free governments are subjects as well as citizens; as citizens they enjoy rights and franchises ; as subjects they are bound to obey the laws. Webster. The term is little used, in this sense, in countries enjoying a republican form of government. See The Pizarro, 2 Wheat. 245, 4 L. Ed. 226 ; U. S. v. Wong Kim Ark , 169 U. S. 649, 18 Sup. Ct. 456, 42 L. Ed. 890.

        In Scotch law. The thing which is the object of an agreement.

      BLACK'S LAW DICTIONARY, 2ND EDITION, page 1115

       

      ALLEGIANCE. The tie which binds the citizen to the government, in return for the protection which the government affords him.

        2. It is natural, acquired, or local. Natural allegiance is such as is due from all men born within the United States ; acquired allegiance is that which is due by a naturalized citizen. It has never been decided whether a citizen can, by expatriation, divest himself absolutely of that character. 2 Cranch, 64; 1 Peters' C. C. Rep. 159; 7 Wheat. R. 283; 9 Mass. R. 461. Infants cannot assume allegiance, (4 Bin. 49) although they enlist in the army of the United States . 5 Bin. 429.

        3. It seems, however, that he cannot renounce his allegiance to the United States without the permission of the government, to be declared by law. But for commercial purposes he may acquire the rights of a citizen of another country, and the place of his domicil determines the character of a party as to trade. 1 Kent, Com. 71; Com. Rep. 677; 2 Kent, Com. 42.

        4. Local allegiance is that which is due from an alien, while resident in the United States, for the protection which the government affords him. 1 Bl. Com. 366, 372; Com. Dig. h.t; Dane's Ab. Index, h. t.; 1 East, P.C. 49 to 57.

      BLACK'S LAW DICTIONARY, 2ND EDITION, page 59

       

      ACQUIESCENCE. Acquiescence is where a person who knows that he is entitled to impeach a transaction or enforce a right neglects to do so for such a length of time that, under the circumstances of the case, the other party may fairly infer that he has waived or abandoned his right. Scott v. Jackson, 89 Cal. 258, 26 Pac. 898; Lowncles v. Wicks, 69 Conn. 15, 36 Atl. 1072 ; Norfolk & W. R. Co. v. Perdue, 40 W. Va. 442, 21 S. B. 755 ; Pence v. Langdon, 99 U. S. 578, 25 L. Ed. 420.

        Acquiescence and laches are cognate but not equivalent terms. The former is a submission to, or resting satisfied with, an existing state of things, while laches implies a neglect to do that which the party ought to do for his own benefit or protection. Hence laches may be evidence of acquiescence. Laches imports a merely passive assent, while acquiescence implies active assent. Lux v. Haggin, 69 Cal. 255, 10 Pac. 678; Kenyon v. National Life Ass'n, 39 App. Div. 276. 57 N. Y. Supp. GO; Johnson-Brinkman Commission Co. v. Missouri Pac. R. Co., 126 Mo. 345, 28 S. W. 870, 26 L. R. A. 840, 47 Am. St. Rep. 675.  BLACK’S LAW DICTIONARY, 2ND EDITION, page 20.

       

      Which along with most peoples complete FAILURE to VERIFY & RESEARCH things, is one of the many REASONS WHY I feel that the “patriot community” CONTINUES to go “nowhere fast”.

       

      Patrick in California

       

      Founder, ALLIANCE for PEACE & PROSPERITY
      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/alliancepeaceprosperity/

       

      "You must go after your wish. As soon as you start to pursue a dream, your life wakes up and everything has meaning."--Barbara Sher

       

       

    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.