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

FYI: FEAR: CA: Help us fight Eureka's proposed forfeiture ordinance!

Expand Messages
  • drw1 /acc
    ============== URGENT -- PLEASE CROSS POST TO OTHER LISTS!! ================= From: Brenda Grantland, Forfeiture Endangers American Rights Sunday, August 1,
    Message 1 of 7 , Aug 2 8:29 AM
      ============== URGENT -- PLEASE CROSS POST TO OTHER LISTS!!
      =================

      From: Brenda Grantland, Forfeiture Endangers American Rights
      Sunday, August 1, 2004

      The City Council of Eureka (county seat of Humboldt County, California)
      has a proposed forfeiture ordinance on the agenda for Tuesday, August 3,
      which would make it a misdemeanor to loiter for the purpose of
      soliciting prostitution or using, buying or selling drugs, and would
      make cars that faciliate that loitering forfeitable. We just got a copy
      of the proposed ordinance over the weekend, and unfortunately the copy
      quality is too poor to scan. We're trying to get a data copy and will
      send it out over FEAR-List and post it on the FEAR website
      (www.fear.org) when we do.

      Among the other curiosities of this piece of legislation, the
      territorial reach for the new Eureka crime of loitering encompasses the
      following locations -- and the adjacent block: "parks [blah,
      blah,blah]... any public street or alley or parking lot." If you can't
      loiter within the adjacent block of any public street or alley or
      parking lot, then they've covered the whole city.

      Warrantless seizures of vehicles are justified by probable cause to
      believe the property was used "in violation of this chapter" -- that
      means for merely loitering with (what the police believe is) the intent
      to purchase drugs or engage in prostitution, they can take your car.
      ยง132.23(B).

      Eureka sits on California highway 101, the major (and only) artery
      through the upper northern coast of California. Route 101 goes right
      through that town, without a bypass where travellers from other areas
      could skirt the city limits. Obviously, it's the perfect area for a
      forfeiture trap, especially since Humboldt County is known for marijuana
      production - reputedly the highest quality in the country. "Traveling to
      a drug destination" is one of the elements of a drug courier profile --
      so half of the probable cause to stop any car found traveling through
      Eureka and loitering - especially with out of state tags - is already
      supplied by the town and its reputation!

      This is a huge cause for concern to us at FEAR. Another vague and
      unconstitutional forfeiture ordinance passed means another ordinance
      we'll have to fight to get taken off the books. FEAR board member Mark
      Clausen has filed civil suits to overturn several city-wide forfeiture
      ordinances in California, and twice the court has found the ordinance
      unconstitutional (Richmond and Sacramento). If Eureka passes this
      ordinance, they can expect litigation over its constitutionality, and
      should figure in those costs as they compute the profitability of such a
      statute.

      Another thing they should factor in is the damage to income from
      tourism. This ordinance is a serious threat to vacationers and travelers
      along the Pacific coast. There is no way to travel along the coast from
      Oregon to Northern California without traveling on the streets of this
      town. This new forfeiture ordinance should send a stern message to
      tourists thinking of taking the picturesque coastal route - stopping to
      rest and stretch your legs in Eureka might mean losing your car! Take
      your tourist dollars elsewhere!

      Anyone who contemplates taking the coastal route any time in the future
      should write the Eureka City Council and let them know your objections
      to this proposed ordinance.

      Here's where to write:

      City Council addresses:
      virginia@...
      kerrigan@...
      mbwolford@...
      jleonard@...
      mjones@...

      Mayor:
      plavallee@...
      City Atty:
      dtranberg@...

      Please cc me (brenda1@...),
      and also, Estelle Fennel at the local radio station, KMUD, with your
      views. Estelle Fennel's address at KMUD:
      efennell@...
    • Frog Farmer
      There are no officers capable of signing or deciding anything. Read the State constitution at Art. XX section 3 and tell me why you would call someone an
      Message 2 of 7 , Aug 11 12:53 PM
        There are no "officers" capable of signing or deciding anything. Read
        the State constitution at Art. XX section 3 and tell me why you would
        call someone an office holder when they do not have the required oath
        of office on file.

        Anyone can be elected, but being elected is NOT what transfers lawful
        powers of an officer to your neighbor. It takes his conscious
        agreement to take the required oath of office BEFORE entering upon the
        duties of the office. At least you should read your constitution, and
        then enforce it yourself by NOT calling impersonators "officers".
        Impersonation is a crime, and a citizen can make an arrest for a crime
        committed in one's presence.

        I disqualify everyone from meddling in my life. Why don't you try it?

        On Aug 2, 2004, at 8:29 AM, drw1 /acc wrote:

        >
        > ============== URGENT -- PLEASE CROSS POST TO OTHER LISTS!!
        > =================
        >
        > From: Brenda Grantland, Forfeiture Endangers American Rights
        > Sunday, August 1, 2004
        >
        > The City Council of Eureka (county seat of Humboldt County,
        > California)
        > has a proposed forfeiture ordinance on the agenda for Tuesday, August
        > 3,
      • Steve Laubly
        I can see how it would work for you, raising frogs and being unemployed, but some of us want a little more. Owning and running a business with 35 to 40
        Message 3 of 7 , Aug 11 8:54 PM
          I can see how it would work for you, raising frogs and being unemployed, but
          some of us want a little more. Owning and running a business with 35 to 40
          employees...all indpendent contractors and no W4s or 1099s, with gross
          revenues averaging from 200,000 to 300,000 per month, it is not realistic to
          do business in silver and gold...1 month would be 2,700 tp 4,100 pounds of
          silver, or 41 to 62 pounds of gold, all split up between the 35 to 40
          employees, who would then have to go talk the guy at the gas station, the
          grocery store, and the phone company, utilities provider, and the landlord
          to take the pounds of gold or silver instead of FRNs or a check. What fun
          it would be showing up at the airport with $20,000 worth of gold and trying
          to get past the metal detectors, and then trying to buy your ticket with a
          couple Krugerands. And how would they give you change....If the ticket was
          $650, you pay with 2 maple leafs, they owe you either 25 ounces of silver,
          or .375 ounces of gold. You are gonna be in that line for a long, long time
          before you get your change......
          What works for frog farming somehow just doesn't cut it in the business
          world.

          _____



          There are no "officers" capable of signing or deciding anything. Read
          the State constitution at Art. XX section 3 and tell me why you would
          call someone an office holder when they do not have the required oath
          of office on file.
        • Frog Farmer
          ... Thanks. It works for anyone who wants it to work enough to think it through. ... Actually, raising frogs is something anyone can do. It takes about an
          Message 4 of 7 , Aug 12 1:53 PM
            On Aug 11, 2004, at 8:54 PM, Steve Laubly wrote:

            > I can see how it would work for you

            Thanks. It works for anyone who wants it to work enough to think it
            through.

            > raising frogs and being unemployed,

            Actually, raising frogs is something anyone can do. It takes about an
            hour a month.
            The hardest part for people is constraining their actions so as to not
            ruin the environment.
            My frogs are my "canary in the mine", as is the lichen on the rocks
            nearby. If they are happy, the whole environment is happy.

            As for being unemployed, that is because I will not lower myself to the
            status of a slave in the country that brags about the freedom of its
            people. Of course, things change, and if I were desparate enough, I
            might sell myself for what I need. So far, despite multiple
            life-threatening injuries, I've been able to remain independent.

            > but some of us want a little more.

            I already have all I want, which includes all the stuff my employed
            father pointed out that were owned and enjoyed by his "boss" who
            himself was a corporate employee. It might be interesting to compare
            our "haves and have-nots" to see whether the "more" you want is
            something I already have. For example, how much gold and silver do you
            have, how many gemstones (that even some FRN-users use to hedge against
            the automatic inflation they support) how much land under cultivation,
            how much land in a pristine wild state, where wild turkeys raise their
            young, woodpeckers drum and frogs croak? How many buildings and cars
            and trucks do you own or control? I am debt-free - are you? I could
            live without government (and do). Could you?

            > Owning and running a business with 35 to 40
            > employees...all indpendent contractors and no W4s or 1099s, with gross
            > revenues averaging from 200,000 to 300,000 per month

            The IR$ and most others distinguish between "employees" and
            "independent contractors". Heck, my trading network supports over 40
            independent contractors already. No W4s or 1099's for sure! Hahahaha!
            I choose not to own, but to control. However, nothing I do steals
            real values from people while passing them irredeemable debt. That's
            just a moral thing I can afford to maintain.

            Is this your desired end in itself, or do you not do it as a vehicle to
            gain more FRNS which you will spend on the "more" you really want?
            Or is this the "more"? I don't desire to order or control other
            people's lives, take their earnings under false pretenses falsely
            described as "insurance" or "taxes", act as an unpaid collection agent
            of the Federal Reserve, or give away 200,000 - 300,000 (of what, you
            didn't specify) of anything in return for liabilities in equity
            jurisdiction. But I find nothing wrong with doing that for people who
            know what they are doing, as you apparently do. I have a problem with
            it when people are led to believe it's the only way to live, because it
            is not. It is a relatively new way to live for a majority.

            I have a problem when people whine and complain about the effects they
            suffer from dealing in "business" (BTW, have you ever seen an
            "official" definition of that term?) as if "owning a business" were
            some function of nature they could not avoid, as if they needed it to
            get the "more" they all want. Another peeve is people who ask the
            state for the right to procreate and then complain when the children
            are taken away. Some have no idea that there are still some parents
            who cannot have their children taken away. See the parallel? It
            highlights the lies, that there is only the propagandized way of life
            and no other.

            > it is not realistic to do business in silver and gold...

            Tell that to the "big boys" who keep theirs in vaults and move it daily
            from one to another with forklifts.
            Tell it to all those folks doing it in every city everyday.
            Actually, silver and gold are more "real" than imaginary debt! And
            both have been used by more people through history than have used
            imaginary debt. As I said, considering the span of human history, this
            new scam is relatively new, although its existence can be dated from
            Babylon if not earlier. Who can say when fraud was first perpetrated?

            > 1 month would be 2,700 tp 4,100 pounds of
            > silver, or 41 to 62 pounds of gold, all split up between the 35 to 40
            > employees, who would then have to go talk the guy at the gas station,
            > the
            > grocery store, and the phone company, utilities provider, and the
            > landlord
            > to take the pounds of gold or silver instead of FRNs or a check.

            I can tell you must have been born a long time after I was. Your
            scenario above tells me that, because it was not long ago that people
            routinely used silver and gold as money (and many who have not been
            brainwashed still do) and it was not and is not the silly way you
            describe. It is only that silly way when dealing with the "new folks"
            who have no memory of and were never told how things used to operate as
            late as 1964 in this country. I know that to many, that is ancient
            history. I also know that in the old Soviet Union (which many today
            have never heard of), it was recognized that to advance communism,
            history had to be erased. This is a lesson not lost on today's
            communists. Go look and see how many other planks of the communist
            Manifesto you support, and you might be surprised!

            > What fun
            > it would be showing up at the airport with $20,000 worth of gold and
            > trying
            > to get past the metal detectors,

            That's how you really think it works!? Or are you trying to make what
            I've done for over 25 years seem a lot more difficult than it really
            is?

            Or maybe you just cannot imagine how one might deal in precious metals
            in a more convenient manner?

            That's right, you were born recently. You have no memory or practical
            experience. And now, you've been convinced your way is the only way to
            get "more" even though history is replete with people getting even more
            than you using gold and silver.

            I guess you don't know that the world is waking up to the fraud of the
            Fed and is moving back to a gold standard. Can you tell me where gold
            and silver is currently used as money? Maybe you think "nowhere".
            You'd be wrong if that's what you think. And you wouldn't know that
            gold coins are currently minted in several countries. And you'd have
            no idea how to use them.

            > and then trying to buy your ticket with a
            > couple Krugerands. And how would they give you change....If the
            > ticket was
            > $650, you pay with 2 maple leafs, they owe you either 25 ounces of
            > silver,
            > or .375 ounces of gold. You are gonna be in that line for a long,
            > long time
            > before you get your change......

            You really need to read Merrill Jenkins' book, "Everything I Have Is
            TheIR$". And talk to a few people over 70 years old if they are able
            to relate the way things worked in their own memory prior to that
            ancient date of 1964. Just because a crooked president repudiated the
            debts of the entity he presided over, does not mean that reality was
            changed for those not willing to go along with it. HJR 192 WAS
            repealed.

            > What works for frog farming somehow just doesn't cut it in the business
            > world.
            >

            That's a wonderful exposition of your level of understanding of both.

            I'm on Planet Earth, as real a world as any, while your "business
            world", populated by people claiming to wear "business suits", depends
            upon agreements to pretend (and to those who don't know they are
            pretending, the willingness to lie, cheat, and steal). All to get
            "more".

            I'll bet I already have more than you, and that you could not afford to
            honestly obtain what I already have, part of which is my freedom.

            But here's where I don't have a clue - what does your reply have to do
            with the following which you quoted? I don't see your connection.
            After all, don't constitutions mean what they say for FRN-users and
            non-FRN-users alike?? Is your "business" "operating" in California?

            >
            > There are no "officers" capable of signing or deciding anything. Read
            > the State constitution at Art. XX section 3 and tell me why you would
            > call someone an office holder when they do not have the required oath
            > of office on file.
          • Occupant Family
            Can I ask another dumb question? Steve wants to do the exchanges himself! Does not need to! Why doesn t he just set it up with a new bank . The one they now
            Message 5 of 7 , Aug 12 2:35 PM
              Can I ask another dumb question?

              Steve wants to do the exchanges himself! Does not need to!
              Why doesn't he just set it up with a new "bank".
              The one they now call a "coin shop"... and let the people
              he gives drafts to redeem them where they want? The coin shop can even
              do a partial redemption in "lawful money" and the rest in inflated FRN's
              if
              the people want! Lawful money is taxed at a rate that is 1/12th or less
              of Fed Notes!

              Have a friend who works for Delfi Corp. and they set it up that way for
              him!

              Deo volente,
              Jim

              Blessed be the Lord my rock, that teacheth my hands to war,
              and my fingers to fight. Psalms 144:1
              ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
              On Wed, 11 Aug 2004 20:54:52 -0700 "Steve Laubly" <sundance1@...>
              writes:
              > I can see how it would work for you, raising frogs and being
              > unemployed, but some of us want a little more.
            • scott
              Steve, I agree with you pay em in FRN s and call it history! It is accepted money through out the World, wether it is legal tender or not it sure works when I
              Message 6 of 7 , Aug 15 1:38 PM
                Steve,
                I agree with you pay em in FRN's and call it history! It is accepted money
                through out the World, wether it is legal tender or not it sure works when I
                buy something.
                Scott Williams


                > I can see how it would work for you, raising frogs and being unemployed,
                but
                > some of us want a little more. Owning and running a business with 35 to
                40
              • Frog Farmer
                ... It won t matter, Steve won t answer it. He s ignored all mine, and so has everyone else. It s great! But I don t see the reason to examine minutia when
                Message 7 of 7 , Aug 25 7:50 PM
                  On Aug 12, 2004, at 2:35 PM, Occupant Family wrote:

                  > Can I ask another dumb question?

                  It won't matter, Steve won't answer it. He's ignored all mine, and so
                  has everyone else.

                  It's great! But I don't see the reason to examine minutia when basics
                  are routinely ignored.

                  Weeds are best removed by pulling the root out, not by pulling off a
                  leaf a day.

                  I never heard a thing from the so-called "emergency" in Eureka either.

                  Not even to explain how wrong I am.

                  Except I'm not wrong.

                  NOBODY in over 25 years has refuted my position (unless you count
                  people like Steve who make off-point objections and ignore all
                  questions raised by their contradictory replies.)

                  But almost everyone has ignored it.

                  It's called cognitive dissonance.

                  Uncomfortable facts are ignored rather than face the painful truth.

                  And they say "misery loves company".

                  Apparently.

                  It really highlights the fact that people DO give their consent to what
                  governs them.

                  They give tribunals jurisdiction over them with hardly any resistance,
                  if any.

                  They plead to non-existent "charges". They wouldn't know a "charge"
                  from a lie anyway.

                  And so they support lie after lie, and when the results of living with
                  lies become uncomfortable, they want remedies that are designed for
                  people who live in reality, who do not believe and support lies. But
                  the liars and accomplices don't realize that they impair themselves.

                  They blame the results of their actions on others.

                  They fail to realize that the problem is in their own minds, and is
                  evidenced when they speak.

                  I don't hold much hope that enough of that type will wake up in time to
                  save this country.

                  Not when basics are ignored.


                  Regards,

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