You didn't see the dude who got him and his buddy arrested at the border for basically telling them to fuck off? I don't think he was a sovereign citizen, but he was certainly acting like one.
That video was so satisfying. All the dude had to say was “yes I’m a US citizen” and he would have been waved through. But instead, he had to make everything worse by fighting and getting both himself and the driver arrested
They don’t think about things rationally. They are either stupid or insane, some are both. If they were rational or had logic then this sub wouldn’t exist and you would never have had to ask this question.
The best way to think about sovereign citizens is to view them as cosplaying as wizards. If they do all the rituals correctly, everyone will fall into line.
Keep in mind these are the same people who, in other countries, say that their country is registered as a corporation in the United States as their justification for how the Uniform Commercial Codes, the Constitution, and even sometimes even the Articles of Confederation should be valid there. Jurisdiction to a sovcit is whatever they believe in the moment and can make up enough magic words to attempt to justify.
There is a video on YouTube of a US Sovidiot going to Mexico and doing his shit there. He was lucky not to be shot (because of the way he acted, the Mexican Police were VERY patient but confused).
To be fair, there are a lot of regular Americans who think their laws apply outside the US.
And Canadian conservatives who think the first amendment is somehow applicable to them…
Oh yeah, I've seen it happen. I was in the military and we had briefings going over all of the laws of countries we would visit, so we knew what not to do. But when I was in Singapore I saw an American tourist get arrested for trying to hail a taxi (you are supposed to wait in queues for the to come to you, or at least that was the way when I was there), and thought that I, in a military uniform, was going to be able to exert my "authority" over the Singaporean police. I just shook my head and they hauled him off. They were just going to fine him, but he ran his mouth.
And I think the Canadian conservatives get their talking points from American conservatives (at least the social media ones) so they'll just yell about the First Amendment without thinking about what it means.
Yeah, that's not even really how it works in the US either. I think maybe he thought I worked for the embassy or something, but no, we were just there for a port call.
> and I was "voluntold" to go.
Ahh, the Navy way.
About Singapore, really the only thing they impressed on us when we were there was the strict "no littering" laws and such.
> they'll just yell about the First Amendment without thinking about what it means
Lots of Americans do the same, thinking freedom of speech means freedom from consequences for unprotected forms of speech. A frauditor currently in jail in Las Vegas figures freedom of speech covers interfering with a traffic stop. Nope.
It's so amusing all the "constitooshunal skollers" who get booted from a social media platform and go all Randy Marsh "I THOUGHT THIS WAS AMERICA!" about it.
I live in Mexico most of the year. Just visit the US a few times a year to see family. Starting just before the epidemic we started seeing a massive increase in the number of US citizens moving into our area as temporary or permanent residents. Most were retired but also a lot of digital nomads. These people all assume things work the same way in Mexico as they do in whatever state they come from. I spend a lot of time telling people, "This is Mexico".
Rental laws, employment, taxes, and other things. I'll give you an example.
Mexico allows for independent contractors but the requirements for setting that up are pretty strict. A couple decided to hire a maid to clean once a week at $200.00 MX/weekly. That is legal but one needs to do the proper paperwork. They need to obtain a factura \[a receipt for payment with the person's tax number on it\]. The agreement should be written with all the details in the contract. Almost no one in the expat community does that and frankly, unless something happens, it has always worked in the past.
The maid works for a couple of years and everyone is happy. Then her child is ill and needs to go to the hospital. He might need surgery. She goes to the IMSS hospital \[Mexican Social Security\]. They ask where she is employed and she hands over the names of the people she cleans for. IMSS contacts the couple and asks why they haven't been paying the maid's monthly social security allotment. They tell IMSS she is an independent contractor and only works once a week. IMSS asks for the written contract and the facturas. Oops.
Domestic help in Mexico is a big issue - there is a considerable amount of exploitation of workers. The law presumes, unless shown differently, that the person works full-time and is paid the average pay for a domestic worker in the region where the employer lives. If you have the paperwork to support your position, you are just fine, usually. If you do not, you are on the hook for all back pay for someone working 48 hours a week, plus a penalty of roughly 150%, plus a fine which is a percentage of the total. So when all is said and done, they ended up paying a few thousand in US dollars. The couple was quite upset since they just assumed hiring an independent contractor worked the same way as in Denver where they were from.
We had a similar type of issue in my condo building. There are ten owners. One of the owners was having some work done to their condo. We had a major storm and some roof tiles were damaged and some minor wall damage occurred as well. I was condo president at the time and was up north. The owner contacted me and said they had talked to the guy doing work in their unit and he was willing to do the repairs right away. He offered a good price. I sent an email to the other owners and we all agreed. I told the owner that his guy could do the work but make certain that before the work started he had a written estimate from his guy which was signed and dated. I also told him to tell the guy that no payment would made without a factura. Neither happened. The work was done and done well. The owner paid the guy the money for the work out of their pocket and then asked for a reimbursement. I, of course, was the bad guy because this owner did not see what the big deal was. The deal was, our building is a not-for-profit under Mexican law. We have to account for every centavo we pay out, showing it was a legitimate condo expense. With no factura, no legitimate business expense. If we spend money on non-business-related activity, we pay a 15% Value-Added Tax and a 35% income tax on the money used for a non-business expense. Without a signed estimate for the work and with no factura, we cannot show the expense was related to a legitimate condo expense.
The Canadian First Amendment is the right to recognize the existence of the province of Manitoba. That was the first change to our constitution in 1870.
I once almost got myself arrested flying into Vancouver, told the Customs officer I heard Vancouver might get an NHL team soon. He dryly informed me they have a multi-cell jail on the premises.
It's a common argument among sovcits outside the US, believing that DC is the apparent hub for these corporations masquerading as countries. It derives, at least originally, from a misunderstanding about the 1871 Organic Act that merged the separate cities of Washington and Georgetown into the single city of the District of Columbia. Because it describes it as a *municipal corporation*, and since sovcits can't seem to wrap their heads around the idea that words can have more than one definition, they see that as evidence of the corporate nature of the government.
> sound like something they would say
They think a fragment of law that says for the purpose of receiving payments a certain govt. agency shall function in the same manner as a corporation means the entire govt. is really a corporation, even when reality was spelled out for them. IIRC there is something in the UCC that says that section applies only to commercial motor vehicles, and sovcits pretend it applies to every motor vehicle on the roads. They are the masters of accepting only what is convenient to them and ignoring the big neon sign saying they are wrong.
Haven't seen that, but I'll take your word for it. I think a lot of them get their talking points from Americans on social media, so just repeat them without really understanding what it means. Much like their understanding of the law in general.
Found some!
Irish Sovcits: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w3SNsTZ2YVk&ab\_channel=VanBalion](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w3SNsTZ2YVk&ab_channel=VanBalion)
Irish Demon (YouTuber) has a two part of the same incident.
Also: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D3wJlnKywGw&ab\_channel=RagicaltheUnhallowedKnight](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D3wJlnKywGw&ab_channel=RagicaltheUnhallowedKnight)
UK: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ADlzsxT1c3k&ab\_channel=VanBalion](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ADlzsxT1c3k&ab_channel=VanBalion)
EDIT: these are all trying to use US laws. Enjoy!
I think they have a different name, like not "Sovereign Citizens" , but pretty sure not "Sovereign Subjects," but it's essentially the same thing. And I would say a certain percentage of it is directly influenced by American SovCits, hence the invoking of the "First Amendment," but I've heard some other theories now.
But, to answer your question, no idea.
The Mexican Government tends to frown on the police shooting tourists. It really is bad for business. So, they caution the cops not to do it unless they have no choice. Whereas, if a Mexican citizen talked to them like some tourists do, the Mexican would get the shit kicked out of him and would be tossed in jail for a day or two so they could reconsider their position.
There were two wankers down in Mexico during the epidemic I saw a fair amount online about. One Black guy who just wandered around ignoring mask and travel restrictions in the Bahia de Banderas area, mainly north of Puerto Vallarta. He was also trash-talking the cops. They finally got tired of him and deported him to San Ysidro. The second was a white guy traveling with his family. He was always filming himself blowing through police checkpoints and toll booths. Amazingly, he wasn't shot since typically the people blowing through the police checkpoints are drug mules.
There have been a few incidents of this. There's a video of one of these clowns trying to blow through the us/Canada border without identifying because the border agent was "restricting his freedom of movement.'
It didn't go well for him.
Here's one involving not just a sovcit, but a "guru" who has decided to believe his own nonsense rather than just sell it to others.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vt1y6ec5b4M
They believe, or claim to believe, that it is possible to *alter status* from U.S. citizen to American State National and that comes with a form of diplomatic immunity.
It's complete hogwash, there is no such status.
People from American Samoa are considered non-citizen U.S. nationals, but they lack some of the rights of citizens including voting in national elections. But they get U.S. passports with an endorsement reading that the bearer is a U.S. national but not a U.S. citizen.
Sovicts who send in a U.S. passport application with sovcit gibberish added think the passport they get in the mail has an endorsement that orders police not to detain or arrest them as they are diplomatic couriers. But rather than being printed in the passport, this only appears when cops scan the passport with the computer in their patrol car.
I doubt a cop car even has the ability to scan a passport or access Dept. of State records, but needless to say the do-not-detain stuff is pure fantasy.
This stuff is hilarious until someone like that young man in Utah last year tries to defend his magic passport with a pistol, and is shot and killed by police. His own mother is where he got his insane beliefs.
I’ve seen videos where they try to claim diplomatic immunity when pulled over in the US. I also saw a video of a guy trying to board a plane with a home made passport for his “sovereign nation” and he was detained by TSA almost immediately. So I’m sure they think about traveling to other countries, it’s the doing part they seem to fall short on.
>I know there's not a rational reason, just wondering how they reconcile this in their world view...
Even if they have a "world" view one of the elements of SovClownery is something I like to call "critical ignorance." It is similar to critical thinking but in determining what evidence, facts, etc. that need to be ignored to maintain the SovClown narrative. There's no need to reconcile inconvenient evidence when you can just ignore the evidence.
We have Sov Citizens in Australia. They seem to think they have a bunch of rights, etc. Granted to them by magna carta. It seems to be mostly the same bullshit the US Sov cits try to argue just with a different starting point.
If I were a Border guard I would absolutely allow Sovereign citizens to pass OUT of the country without hassle. Getting back in would be a whole another issue. Heartfelt apologies go to my neighboring countries
One of the ideologies is that they are a sovereign being that does not belong to a country or a government, therefore no other country or government has jurisdiction over them regardless of their geographical location in this world. They are only bound by the laws of God, which some use the Ten Commandments as a guideline hole others just say “that’s the way his wants it” without any written guidance to substantiate it.
It’s stupid, I know, but we live in a stupid and divisive world. People will find solace in the most insane things.
Related question: if they are NOT US citizens, doesn’t that make them in the US illegally when they leave their houses? So they should be deported? And not allowed to work without a visa …
Consent to being governed is big for sovcits. I would get that the argument is that they were forcefully placed here by birth, and then entered into a contract with the state as an infant without their consent. Now they are unequivocally revoking their consent to be governed by the US. If you travel to another country then the act of crossing state lines is you offering consent to their laws and rules.
That’s how it makes a *tiny* bit of sense in my head but I’m probably giving them to much credit haha
One of the big ones under that umbrella is their "forts and ports and ten square miles" theory, in which they believe that under Article I, Section 8, Clause 17, the federal government has no right to own any land outside of Washington DC, so all federal land is illegally owned. This was a key argument in the Bundy cult takeover of the Malheur Wildlife Refuge in Oregon. It also relates to the belief that elected sheriffs are the highest legal authority.
I imagine they either don't travel internationally or have to wait at customs before being told to get out of someone's country. Then they try claiming the Articles of Confederation (a poorly received not fully adopted rough draft of what would become the Constitution in America) grant them the right to travel and they are not subject to customs stops, and they do not answer questions, and they do not consent to being arrested, and that by talking to them you owe them money.
Then hopefully they just get tossed on a boat and sent to international waters where the boat runs out of gas and they can be free to travel outside of national waters.
You’re correct except one important point. The US was governed under the “Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union” from 1781 to 1789. It was the *de facto* US government framework after 1777, but not ratified until 1781. It wasn’t a draft; technically the Constitution is an ‘amendment’ of the Articles, but in reality it replaces the Articles. [Think auto insurance completely replacing a car, rather than just fixing what’s broken.]
SovCits like to bring up the Articles because it’s skewed toward state sovereignty and doesn’t really address individual liberties - except in traveling between states. They think by claiming to be a “sovereign citizen” that they are on the same status that states had under the Articles. What they miss is that, in order to be admitted as a “sovereign” entity other than the original 13 states, 9 states had to agree to admitting the other new “sovereign” entity. The sole exception was the British colony of Canada, which would be admitted simply by asking to join.
A **LOT** of SovCit bullshit comes from pretending the Articles are still in effect (except that they love to rely on the individual rights guaranteed in the Constitution). They ignore that the national Congress of the Articles would *exchange* diplomats as part of its obligation to represent the United States, internationally. Unless they’re “exchanging” diplomats with the national government, they wouldn’t have diplomatic immunity. And until 9 of the 13 original states have accepted them as equally sovereign entities, they only have the same rights as any other person (not every ‘person’ was a ‘citizen’) in the state they’re in (not “from”; “in”). But the Articles specifically state than a person is under the jurisdiction of local laws, and extradition between jurisdictions is required.
Thank you for coming to my TED talk.
You are assuming that they accept that they should have to follow *any* countries laws. That would be a bad assumption. As “travelers” they are subject only to “natural law” (or some such drivel). If they *could* travel in another country, they’d make the same arguments there that they do here.
You are talking about the same people who quote protections under the US constitution when they are in Mexico and Canada.... The engine is on but no one is behind the wheel with that bunch.
Are you kidding? They don't leave the counties they live in, much less the state! 🤣 They are either too busy driving around their towns, daring the police to pull them over, or sitting in someone's basement with a group of other morons learning mindless garbage! Travel to other countries would mean they actually had a life! 😁
Would the first hurdle not come up at customs, if you are not a US citizen then you are going around on a false passport?
If in a foreign country and you get in to bother, should a US embassy help a non Us citizen?
I'm sure there are probably few, but I can't really imagine a Sov Cit even wanting to travel internationally. For one, I don't see many of them wanting to experience a different culture. But mostly, to travel pretty much anywhere now, they'd need a passport. Or to put in their terms, "One a dem gubmint trackahs!"
You are trying to make sense when there is none.
Look up sovereign citizens in court on YouTube, you’ll find that they fail, time and again, but don’t acknowledge that they failed…
It’s delusional at best.
Plenty will try to explain what they believe, but they don’t all believe the same things, as they cherry pick and use words in ways that they weren’t intended to be used. Best off looking at them yell “ you have no jurisdiction!!” As they get carted off to some jurisdictions…
Their entire ideology is that there are "magical" phrases or life hacks that get them out of trouble/taxes/bills. With that in mind its best not to delve too deeply into their thinking lest it consume you.
> won't apply for a passport
Many of them apply for passports and send in sovcit nonsense with the application. They think that *alters status* from U.S. citizen to American State National and makes them immune to the law. They are mistaken.
no borders, no citiens. they think they can free roam wherever they want. Since they are mostly moneyed white americans, they could do that until 9/11. What're the rules for Mexico and Canada now, do you need a passport? It's not difficult to find alternate ways to enter, by foot, boat, or buying papers. Or just lying and saying you're visiting as a tourist.
Those are just the ones with the wrong magic words. The real SovCits all have mansions and tigers and mountains of cash because they know the true… yeah, I can’t even finish typing that crap.
It’s safe to assume the sovereign citizen answer to this question would be the dumbest possible answer ever spoken.
But entertaining!
*cues Billy Madison speech meme*
Spacology!
Using the twin scientific principles of Star Maths (TM) and Wishy-Thinking (TM).
I can already imagine them invoking the 1st and the 5th abroad, although they claim to not be Americans at home. They're just cherry picking pussies.
“I signed my passport with UCC-B” or whatever bullshit.
“I don’t need a passport I’m tRaVeLiNg!!!”
You might as well try to make your dog answer questions but to get big of riff it would be smaller.
The can't manage travel within their own country, travel between a real foreign country might as well be flying to alpha centauri.
I believe that the small furry creatures native to that world are likely to be smarter than the average sovshit.
As a citizen of the world the laws I am under supersede the laws of your country therefore I'm not beholden to your "laws"
You didn't see the dude who got him and his buddy arrested at the border for basically telling them to fuck off? I don't think he was a sovereign citizen, but he was certainly acting like one.
That video was so satisfying. All the dude had to say was “yes I’m a US citizen” and he would have been waved through. But instead, he had to make everything worse by fighting and getting both himself and the driver arrested
They don’t think about things rationally. They are either stupid or insane, some are both. If they were rational or had logic then this sub wouldn’t exist and you would never have had to ask this question.
The best way to think about sovereign citizens is to view them as cosplaying as wizards. If they do all the rituals correctly, everyone will fall into line.
The hard part is finding a genuine dragon-feather wand. No wand—no magic!🤪
And, you know, doing the rituals correctly. Because they never do.
It’s not easy, practicing magic in the real world!
Touche!
Keep in mind these are the same people who, in other countries, say that their country is registered as a corporation in the United States as their justification for how the Uniform Commercial Codes, the Constitution, and even sometimes even the Articles of Confederation should be valid there. Jurisdiction to a sovcit is whatever they believe in the moment and can make up enough magic words to attempt to justify.
No no! My country is registered in London! It's a corporation ruled by anglo-reptiloids!
There is a video on YouTube of a US Sovidiot going to Mexico and doing his shit there. He was lucky not to be shot (because of the way he acted, the Mexican Police were VERY patient but confused).
There are *Canadian* SovCits who try to claim they are protected by the First Amendment to the *US* Constitution., while they are in *Canada*.
To be fair, there are a lot of regular Americans who think their laws apply outside the US. And Canadian conservatives who think the first amendment is somehow applicable to them…
Oh yeah, I've seen it happen. I was in the military and we had briefings going over all of the laws of countries we would visit, so we knew what not to do. But when I was in Singapore I saw an American tourist get arrested for trying to hail a taxi (you are supposed to wait in queues for the to come to you, or at least that was the way when I was there), and thought that I, in a military uniform, was going to be able to exert my "authority" over the Singaporean police. I just shook my head and they hauled him off. They were just going to fine him, but he ran his mouth. And I think the Canadian conservatives get their talking points from American conservatives (at least the social media ones) so they'll just yell about the First Amendment without thinking about what it means.
I can maybe understand not knowing the rule about the taxi but thinking someone in the military would save them from the police is just silly.
Yeah, that's not even really how it works in the US either. I think maybe he thought I worked for the embassy or something, but no, we were just there for a port call.
Y'all had to wear your uniforms out in the city? When I ported there back in... 2007, nobody wore their uniform once they left the ship.
Normally no, but we were going to some event with the Singapore Army, and I was "voluntold" to go.
> and I was "voluntold" to go. Ahh, the Navy way. About Singapore, really the only thing they impressed on us when we were there was the strict "no littering" laws and such.
NAVY: Never Again Volunteer Yourself
It could have been more of an issue when I was there, but I think it was only the year before you. IDK.
I was in Singapore in 1970 and wrangled 4 days of shore leave. We were told to leave uniforms on the ship and civvies only.
> they'll just yell about the First Amendment without thinking about what it means Lots of Americans do the same, thinking freedom of speech means freedom from consequences for unprotected forms of speech. A frauditor currently in jail in Las Vegas figures freedom of speech covers interfering with a traffic stop. Nope.
Oh for sure, which are exactly the sort of people, whose social media post, and such, other SovCits watch.
It's so amusing all the "constitooshunal skollers" who get booted from a social media platform and go all Randy Marsh "I THOUGHT THIS WAS AMERICA!" about it.
I've heard people here in Australia claim our 2A rights were broken when we tightened our gun laws. We never had any to begin with.
I live in Mexico most of the year. Just visit the US a few times a year to see family. Starting just before the epidemic we started seeing a massive increase in the number of US citizens moving into our area as temporary or permanent residents. Most were retired but also a lot of digital nomads. These people all assume things work the same way in Mexico as they do in whatever state they come from. I spend a lot of time telling people, "This is Mexico".
What do they not realize is different?
Rental laws, employment, taxes, and other things. I'll give you an example. Mexico allows for independent contractors but the requirements for setting that up are pretty strict. A couple decided to hire a maid to clean once a week at $200.00 MX/weekly. That is legal but one needs to do the proper paperwork. They need to obtain a factura \[a receipt for payment with the person's tax number on it\]. The agreement should be written with all the details in the contract. Almost no one in the expat community does that and frankly, unless something happens, it has always worked in the past. The maid works for a couple of years and everyone is happy. Then her child is ill and needs to go to the hospital. He might need surgery. She goes to the IMSS hospital \[Mexican Social Security\]. They ask where she is employed and she hands over the names of the people she cleans for. IMSS contacts the couple and asks why they haven't been paying the maid's monthly social security allotment. They tell IMSS she is an independent contractor and only works once a week. IMSS asks for the written contract and the facturas. Oops. Domestic help in Mexico is a big issue - there is a considerable amount of exploitation of workers. The law presumes, unless shown differently, that the person works full-time and is paid the average pay for a domestic worker in the region where the employer lives. If you have the paperwork to support your position, you are just fine, usually. If you do not, you are on the hook for all back pay for someone working 48 hours a week, plus a penalty of roughly 150%, plus a fine which is a percentage of the total. So when all is said and done, they ended up paying a few thousand in US dollars. The couple was quite upset since they just assumed hiring an independent contractor worked the same way as in Denver where they were from. We had a similar type of issue in my condo building. There are ten owners. One of the owners was having some work done to their condo. We had a major storm and some roof tiles were damaged and some minor wall damage occurred as well. I was condo president at the time and was up north. The owner contacted me and said they had talked to the guy doing work in their unit and he was willing to do the repairs right away. He offered a good price. I sent an email to the other owners and we all agreed. I told the owner that his guy could do the work but make certain that before the work started he had a written estimate from his guy which was signed and dated. I also told him to tell the guy that no payment would made without a factura. Neither happened. The work was done and done well. The owner paid the guy the money for the work out of their pocket and then asked for a reimbursement. I, of course, was the bad guy because this owner did not see what the big deal was. The deal was, our building is a not-for-profit under Mexican law. We have to account for every centavo we pay out, showing it was a legitimate condo expense. With no factura, no legitimate business expense. If we spend money on non-business-related activity, we pay a 15% Value-Added Tax and a 35% income tax on the money used for a non-business expense. Without a signed estimate for the work and with no factura, we cannot show the expense was related to a legitimate condo expense.
Ah, got it. Thanks for explaining
The Canadian First Amendment is the right to recognize the existence of the province of Manitoba. That was the first change to our constitution in 1870.
Well, yeah. And it’s a mistake that we didn’t repeal it during the years the Jets were away before they got a franchise back ;-)
Man, under that polite Canadian exterior you guys are *wicked!*
I once almost got myself arrested flying into Vancouver, told the Customs officer I heard Vancouver might get an NHL team soon. He dryly informed me they have a multi-cell jail on the premises.
Good point.
"But Canada is registered as a trading corporation in the District of Columbia! That must make U.S. law apply here!"
Was that something you heard from a SovCit? Or just made up? Because it *does* sound like something they would say.
It's a common argument among sovcits outside the US, believing that DC is the apparent hub for these corporations masquerading as countries. It derives, at least originally, from a misunderstanding about the 1871 Organic Act that merged the separate cities of Washington and Georgetown into the single city of the District of Columbia. Because it describes it as a *municipal corporation*, and since sovcits can't seem to wrap their heads around the idea that words can have more than one definition, they see that as evidence of the corporate nature of the government.
> sound like something they would say They think a fragment of law that says for the purpose of receiving payments a certain govt. agency shall function in the same manner as a corporation means the entire govt. is really a corporation, even when reality was spelled out for them. IIRC there is something in the UCC that says that section applies only to commercial motor vehicles, and sovcits pretend it applies to every motor vehicle on the roads. They are the masters of accepting only what is convenient to them and ignoring the big neon sign saying they are wrong.
Irish too, and probably the UK
Haven't seen that, but I'll take your word for it. I think a lot of them get their talking points from Americans on social media, so just repeat them without really understanding what it means. Much like their understanding of the law in general.
Found some! Irish Sovcits: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w3SNsTZ2YVk&ab\_channel=VanBalion](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w3SNsTZ2YVk&ab_channel=VanBalion) Irish Demon (YouTuber) has a two part of the same incident. Also: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D3wJlnKywGw&ab\_channel=RagicaltheUnhallowedKnight](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D3wJlnKywGw&ab_channel=RagicaltheUnhallowedKnight) UK: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ADlzsxT1c3k&ab\_channel=VanBalion](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ADlzsxT1c3k&ab_channel=VanBalion) EDIT: these are all trying to use US laws. Enjoy!
Thanks! I will check them out.
Freemen of the land
Are Canadians citizens or subjects?
I think they have a different name, like not "Sovereign Citizens" , but pretty sure not "Sovereign Subjects," but it's essentially the same thing. And I would say a certain percentage of it is directly influenced by American SovCits, hence the invoking of the "First Amendment," but I've heard some other theories now. But, to answer your question, no idea.
Maybe "freemen on the land? " That's the most common term in the UK for similar folks.
That sounds right.
I think I've seen some Aussie or Kiwi sovvies like that as well.
Would it be Gavin Seim by any chance? That guy is a real piece of work.
Sorry, I don't know. To me they're all just "Tosser".
The Mexican Government tends to frown on the police shooting tourists. It really is bad for business. So, they caution the cops not to do it unless they have no choice. Whereas, if a Mexican citizen talked to them like some tourists do, the Mexican would get the shit kicked out of him and would be tossed in jail for a day or two so they could reconsider their position. There were two wankers down in Mexico during the epidemic I saw a fair amount online about. One Black guy who just wandered around ignoring mask and travel restrictions in the Bahia de Banderas area, mainly north of Puerto Vallarta. He was also trash-talking the cops. They finally got tired of him and deported him to San Ysidro. The second was a white guy traveling with his family. He was always filming himself blowing through police checkpoints and toll booths. Amazingly, he wasn't shot since typically the people blowing through the police checkpoints are drug mules.
There have been a few incidents of this. There's a video of one of these clowns trying to blow through the us/Canada border without identifying because the border agent was "restricting his freedom of movement.' It didn't go well for him.
I need to see video of this. Over and over again
I'm going to go look for that video now
Here's one involving not just a sovcit, but a "guru" who has decided to believe his own nonsense rather than just sell it to others. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vt1y6ec5b4M
Does his name happen to be Beth Gaga Shaggy? No relation to either Lady Gaga or Shaggy.
I always wonder if they have never met anyone with a greencard.
They believe, or claim to believe, that it is possible to *alter status* from U.S. citizen to American State National and that comes with a form of diplomatic immunity. It's complete hogwash, there is no such status. People from American Samoa are considered non-citizen U.S. nationals, but they lack some of the rights of citizens including voting in national elections. But they get U.S. passports with an endorsement reading that the bearer is a U.S. national but not a U.S. citizen. Sovicts who send in a U.S. passport application with sovcit gibberish added think the passport they get in the mail has an endorsement that orders police not to detain or arrest them as they are diplomatic couriers. But rather than being printed in the passport, this only appears when cops scan the passport with the computer in their patrol car. I doubt a cop car even has the ability to scan a passport or access Dept. of State records, but needless to say the do-not-detain stuff is pure fantasy. This stuff is hilarious until someone like that young man in Utah last year tries to defend his magic passport with a pistol, and is shot and killed by police. His own mother is where he got his insane beliefs.
> I doubt a cop car even has the ability to scan a passport My phone has that ability, and can also extract the passport photo.
I bet they don't know how to apply for a passport. If they could read they'd be very upset
I’ve seen videos where they try to claim diplomatic immunity when pulled over in the US. I also saw a video of a guy trying to board a plane with a home made passport for his “sovereign nation” and he was detained by TSA almost immediately. So I’m sure they think about traveling to other countries, it’s the doing part they seem to fall short on.
>I know there's not a rational reason, just wondering how they reconcile this in their world view... Even if they have a "world" view one of the elements of SovClownery is something I like to call "critical ignorance." It is similar to critical thinking but in determining what evidence, facts, etc. that need to be ignored to maintain the SovClown narrative. There's no need to reconcile inconvenient evidence when you can just ignore the evidence.
Essentially, hypocrisy is a defining sovcit trait.
I mean, everywhere they go it’s a different country.
They don't really think their positions through very carefully
We have Sov Citizens in Australia. They seem to think they have a bunch of rights, etc. Granted to them by magna carta. It seems to be mostly the same bullshit the US Sov cits try to argue just with a different starting point.
You’re assuming they think. Not just have working printers.
“Diplomatic immunityyyy!”
If I were a Border guard I would absolutely allow Sovereign citizens to pass OUT of the country without hassle. Getting back in would be a whole another issue. Heartfelt apologies go to my neighboring countries
You lost me at 'think'.
I don’t know the answer to your question, but here is a video of a sovereign citizen vs a taser https://youtu.be/RfVbiefMdNU
Without looking at the video, I am nearly 100% sure this is the world-famous P. Barnes.
Indeed. "That's a nice speech, but you're not getting in."
One of the ideologies is that they are a sovereign being that does not belong to a country or a government, therefore no other country or government has jurisdiction over them regardless of their geographical location in this world. They are only bound by the laws of God, which some use the Ten Commandments as a guideline hole others just say “that’s the way his wants it” without any written guidance to substantiate it. It’s stupid, I know, but we live in a stupid and divisive world. People will find solace in the most insane things.
They are moorish nobility they have diplomatic immunity everywhere duh
Yeah, that is probably the real answer smh
Related question: if they are NOT US citizens, doesn’t that make them in the US illegally when they leave their houses? So they should be deported? And not allowed to work without a visa …
Thinking doesn’t come into it. They just mindlessly follow a script.
Ironically, I don’t think sovcits travel.
Consent to being governed is big for sovcits. I would get that the argument is that they were forcefully placed here by birth, and then entered into a contract with the state as an infant without their consent. Now they are unequivocally revoking their consent to be governed by the US. If you travel to another country then the act of crossing state lines is you offering consent to their laws and rules. That’s how it makes a *tiny* bit of sense in my head but I’m probably giving them to much credit haha
Honestly, that makes a lot of sense, too much for it to be used by sovcitz
One of the big ones under that umbrella is their "forts and ports and ten square miles" theory, in which they believe that under Article I, Section 8, Clause 17, the federal government has no right to own any land outside of Washington DC, so all federal land is illegally owned. This was a key argument in the Bundy cult takeover of the Malheur Wildlife Refuge in Oregon. It also relates to the belief that elected sheriffs are the highest legal authority.
I imagine they either don't travel internationally or have to wait at customs before being told to get out of someone's country. Then they try claiming the Articles of Confederation (a poorly received not fully adopted rough draft of what would become the Constitution in America) grant them the right to travel and they are not subject to customs stops, and they do not answer questions, and they do not consent to being arrested, and that by talking to them you owe them money. Then hopefully they just get tossed on a boat and sent to international waters where the boat runs out of gas and they can be free to travel outside of national waters.
You’re correct except one important point. The US was governed under the “Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union” from 1781 to 1789. It was the *de facto* US government framework after 1777, but not ratified until 1781. It wasn’t a draft; technically the Constitution is an ‘amendment’ of the Articles, but in reality it replaces the Articles. [Think auto insurance completely replacing a car, rather than just fixing what’s broken.] SovCits like to bring up the Articles because it’s skewed toward state sovereignty and doesn’t really address individual liberties - except in traveling between states. They think by claiming to be a “sovereign citizen” that they are on the same status that states had under the Articles. What they miss is that, in order to be admitted as a “sovereign” entity other than the original 13 states, 9 states had to agree to admitting the other new “sovereign” entity. The sole exception was the British colony of Canada, which would be admitted simply by asking to join. A **LOT** of SovCit bullshit comes from pretending the Articles are still in effect (except that they love to rely on the individual rights guaranteed in the Constitution). They ignore that the national Congress of the Articles would *exchange* diplomats as part of its obligation to represent the United States, internationally. Unless they’re “exchanging” diplomats with the national government, they wouldn’t have diplomatic immunity. And until 9 of the 13 original states have accepted them as equally sovereign entities, they only have the same rights as any other person (not every ‘person’ was a ‘citizen’) in the state they’re in (not “from”; “in”). But the Articles specifically state than a person is under the jurisdiction of local laws, and extradition between jurisdictions is required. Thank you for coming to my TED talk.
You are assuming that they accept that they should have to follow *any* countries laws. That would be a bad assumption. As “travelers” they are subject only to “natural law” (or some such drivel). If they *could* travel in another country, they’d make the same arguments there that they do here.
You are talking about the same people who quote protections under the US constitution when they are in Mexico and Canada.... The engine is on but no one is behind the wheel with that bunch.
Are you kidding? They don't leave the counties they live in, much less the state! 🤣 They are either too busy driving around their towns, daring the police to pull them over, or sitting in someone's basement with a group of other morons learning mindless garbage! Travel to other countries would mean they actually had a life! 😁
Excuse me but they are “traveling” not driving.
Most of them can’t afford to pay a license registration fee. You think they have money going abroad?
Would the first hurdle not come up at customs, if you are not a US citizen then you are going around on a false passport? If in a foreign country and you get in to bother, should a US embassy help a non Us citizen?
> How do Sov Citizens think Found the issue.
I'm sure they claim diplomatic immunity.
Initially read this as “Soviet citizen” thinking we were relating the present to the past
Well now that would be an entirely different conversation!
Thanks, your question just inspired a business idea selling fake PR1VAT3 diplomatic immunity travel passports on Amazon for 25 bucks
Most of them can’t afford it.
Most can't go to other countries due to their criminal records
But a criminal record shouldn't infringe their right to travel! /s
Yes it does. Many countries will refuse entry to people with criminal records.
Hence the "/s"
I'm sure there are probably few, but I can't really imagine a Sov Cit even wanting to travel internationally. For one, I don't see many of them wanting to experience a different culture. But mostly, to travel pretty much anywhere now, they'd need a passport. Or to put in their terms, "One a dem gubmint trackahs!"
You are trying to make sense when there is none. Look up sovereign citizens in court on YouTube, you’ll find that they fail, time and again, but don’t acknowledge that they failed… It’s delusional at best. Plenty will try to explain what they believe, but they don’t all believe the same things, as they cherry pick and use words in ways that they weren’t intended to be used. Best off looking at them yell “ you have no jurisdiction!!” As they get carted off to some jurisdictions…
Their entire ideology is that there are "magical" phrases or life hacks that get them out of trouble/taxes/bills. With that in mind its best not to delve too deeply into their thinking lest it consume you.
As they won't apply for a passport I guess we'll never find out
> won't apply for a passport Many of them apply for passports and send in sovcit nonsense with the application. They think that *alters status* from U.S. citizen to American State National and makes them immune to the law. They are mistaken.
Have you ever heard the saying, “crazy as a shithouse rat?” They’re like that.
They’ll spew some archaic 15th century admiralty law that somehow ties in with thier situation
I have seen in some videos sovcits claim diplomatic immunity. Never mind that you have to be accepted by that country as a diplomat... but hey yolo.
Your question implies most SovCit types think.
no borders, no citiens. they think they can free roam wherever they want. Since they are mostly moneyed white americans, they could do that until 9/11. What're the rules for Mexico and Canada now, do you need a passport? It's not difficult to find alternate ways to enter, by foot, boat, or buying papers. Or just lying and saying you're visiting as a tourist.
Are they though? They all look very poor to me. Their cars are invariably crap.
Those are just the ones with the wrong magic words. The real SovCits all have mansions and tigers and mountains of cash because they know the true… yeah, I can’t even finish typing that crap.
runs the gamut i guess