How to deal with traffic tickets lawfully.

Refusal for cause and clarification , Knowing this is important

For those who keep asking about refusing for cause and asking for clarification of terms and jurisdiction in court

Logical court arguments ,

Before we proceed in any type of court , admiralty , provincial , supreme, civil family or whatever type of label they decide to claim authority over you first need to establish two things , Jurisdiction and supremacy. What language ( jurisdiction ) will be used and who has supremacy ( authority ) and where does it come from ?

When the man or woman who enters the room “acting” as the “ judge” the crown prosecutor refers to him or her as “ your honor “ or in Canada now it is “Your worship “. There is a presumption on the part of the people that this man or woman has been somehow elevated to a position where he / she can unilaterally impose judgement on another human being but from where could any one human being gain such power ? Only from two places could a man/woman get this type of power. From contracted acceptance or from an accepted perception of authority. If you are aware of both options you will need to clarify in court which option is valid and what measures if none exist are used to enforce such a perceived authority .

You need clarification or the cause must be refused . Every ticket, fine or summons must then be refused for cause and for clarification . For the last 10 years I have written this in bold letters on any attempt to extort monies from me and have never received clarification of their demands so I have never paid a ticket fine or charge. This has always been the most important question in law. Who has authority, where do they get it, and why do we accept it ?

In any case brought before a court that is not dejure ( juried ) in nature you are playing a game , it is all theater and you are being asked to accept this theater as reality when in fact it is nothing more than Actors with elaborate props playing a role.

Sample arguments to establish supremacy are simple.

You have been charged with 4 counts of possession of a controlled substance how do you plead ? Asks the judge.

Lets look at this question and the charge and the word “charge” which is a “demand of a price for a service or goods supplied” and they use the phrase “counts of “ which is accounting for total charges which means you have somehow sold them something or provided a service to correct ? First you need to ask to whom did I provide a service to be charged for, who determines its worth, and when did we enter into this transaction ?

Second part of this original common phrase based on “charges” says it is a controlled substance . So the obvious question is who can claim authority over a natural substance to control it and for what purpose ? These are all valid and important questions if any entity wants to claim supremacy over nature .

How do you plead is the final step here right ? To plead is to “beg for forgiveness” or simply “to beg” first of all you never beg for anything so the simple and logical question to this demand is .....

“Who are you and where do you claim supremacy over me that I should have to beg for anything from someone who arrogantly thinks they can control nature and thinks I somehow provided a service for which a charge is pending ?”

First before we even get to court if in fact you are summoned you have to also ask a question . Why am I being summoned and why should I consider this invitation ? On most summons it shows your all capitol name which most of us now know is not really you but merely a corporate legal fiction and it has your address and some address of a court or corporation of the city of that it was issued from . It may even have a stamped signature from a judge or justice of the peace . This also can simply be refused for cause and for clarification , Who makes the claim against you , why have you been invited to appear ? And as before who can claim the authority to enforce this order if in fact it is an order from the state should it not as an order be answered with a bill ?

You can write on this summons, ticket, or order ,

“ refused for cause and for clarification “ then if you wish, state your questions or objections, as you are not obligated to take any time out of your day or worse spend an entire day of valuable time entertaining some unsubstantiated request based on nothing more than a perception that these people have assumed an authority to demand your attendance.

The obvious concern of most people is “ if I don't go they will send the police or render a judgement in my absence “ . well the thing of this is by asking for clarification you have actually addressed the issuer of this summons and they can not say that you are not attending . The question needs to be answered first before they can claim that you did not attend . They have offered you a contract to appear and you have asked for a valid reason why you should , the ball is in their court and you are simply waiting for them to either hit the ball back or quit the game.

If you decide to go to court which I tell people daily is a bad idea since once you do enter that place you are being intimidated by physical violence since they have men there with guns and a limited liability of impunity to use force against you.

This brings me to another subject if you do decide to go to court , How do they enforce this perceived authority and hold up the illusion of theater that they call court ? More questions need to be asked before you can proceed . If you have already tried to determine supremacy and have not received an adequate response , one very important question that must be asked is “ since we have not been able to come to acceptable terms of supremacy how do you intend to enforce your demands ? Do you intend to answer my concerns or are you going to instruct your enforcement officers to unlawfully assault me ? “

The only way the state can enforce their illusion is just by that “ in force “ so you need to clarify whether or not you are there by consent , deception , or are you being coerced to attend and if so you are being tried under a forced consideration. I could get into the whole “under contract “ argument which is more obvious and defendable but this is for logical purposes , I find it is important to bring these people into their own deception and ask questions that make them realize their own corruption under law , the perversions they defend and the due process they now see as an affront to their extortion scheme.

You have a right and a duty to ask these questions and asking pertinent questions that otherwise would allow a violation of your body and dignity are absolutely relevant and acceptable terms . What is your dignity worth ? Would you allow yourself to violated without first making your oppressor aware of the violations that they threaten you with ? Make it known to everyone or they will surely violate you . Make it very clear in their house in front of any witnesses that will listen , your life and freedom are at stake .

So what do we know based on all of this ? All claims need to be substantiated prior to acceptance , that is “refused for cause and clarification” of all offers from the state , tickets, fines, summons, charges and orders. Asking questions prior to allowing someone to pass judgement against you is an absolute necessity and if they do not or cannot answer your questions appropriately or validate their claim that they have an authority over you tells you that they simple do not,
You already know that they do not but making them realize that they do not is important . Obviously they can not proceed until they have shown you how they have this authority and if not by getting them to admit to the gallery and to the world that the only authority they have is by using a force of guns an coercion . Once you have ascertained that confession from someone who illegitimately claims to have supremacy over you you can then ask them ....... Is that not slavery ?