Requirement for Consent

6.3. Changes the status applicant into the equivalent of a public officer in the government managing public property. 1 A public officer, after all, is legally defined as a person in charge of the property of the public, which property is 2 the “benefit” or property conveyed or loaned to the applicant. 3 6.4. Is interpreted by courts of justice as what is called a “purposeful availment” of commerce within the legislative 4 jurisdiction of the government grantor which waives sovereign immunity under the Foreign Sovereign 5 Immunities Act (F.S.I.A.), 28 U.S.C. Chapter 97, and the Longarm Statutes of your state. 6 7. Those who have not VOLUNTARILY applied or who are threatened with illegal enforcement when they DO NOT 7 apply may not lawfully become the target of civil regulation of their activities or conduct. For instance, a nonresident 8 PRIVATE human being NOT lawfully engaged in a public office and NOT using the public roadways for hire, if he is 9 indicted or convicted of driving without a license, is the subject of criminal duress, simulation of legal process, witness 10 tampering, and international terrorism. 11 8. The output of the application process results in the transfer of SPECIFIC material property that REMAINS government 12 property AFTER the applicant receives it, and therefore constitutes a REVOCABLE TEMPORARY LOAN. The right 13 to take back the property is the method of REVOKING the franchise or privilege. Such property might include: 14 8.1. Driver license. 15 8.2. Social Security Card. 16 8.3. Government ID. 17 8.4. Resident ID card. 18 8.5. Professional license. 19 8.6. USA passport. 20 8.7. License to practice law. 21 8.8. Vehicle license plate and registration card. 22 8.9. Resident green card. 23 9. Consonant with the civil regulation of the applicant is the right to extract “fees” and/or “taxes” that pay for the 24 “benefit” of the regulation. This would include vehicle registration fees, property taxes, Social Security deductions, 25 etc. 26 9.1. If the fees collected pay for any purpose OTHER than DIRECTLY delivering the regulation under ONLY that 27 specific franchise, then a “revenue scheme” and abuse has occurred. 28 9.2. If the franchise forces you to sign up for ANOTHER not directly related franchise, it is an abuse and a tort. For 29 instance, if the driver licensing forces you to provide a Social Security Number, then indirectly they are forcing 30 you to sign up for YET ANOTHER franchise not directly related to safe travel on the roadways. This violates the 31 unconstitutional conditions doctrine of the U.S. Supreme Court. 32 1. Establish them to prevent an activity that the applicant does NOT regard as harmful or which does not in fact protect 34 anything or anyone but the undeserving. 35 2. Establish them PRIMARILY for revenue (the love of money), and then to PRETEND that some public injury will 36 occur if they are NOT instituted that in fact is NOT an injury according to the intended applicants or participants. 37 Many examples come to mind, such as Obamacare, Social Security, Medicare, etc. 38 3. Extract fees and taxes FAR BEYOND the cost of administering the regulation. 39 4. Make each and every franchise into a gateway to FORCE the applicant to be subject to ANY AND EVERY OTHER 40 franchise offered by the government. This is called an “adhesion contract” and it is unconscionable. For instance, 41 force everyone signing up for driver licenses to become a statutory “U.S. citizen” domiciled on federal territory and 42 subject to ANY and ALL federal law, even though the separation of powers doctrine does NOT permit it. 43 5. Illegally prosecute those who do not consent to participate for “failure to obtain a license”. 44 6. Redistribute the excess fees generated for totally unrelated purposes to bribe voters to expand the franchise and the 45 corresponding revenues, in what amounts to a Ponzi scheme. 46 The most flagrant and blatant abuse of franchises is to: 33

We describe the above combination of tactic as socialism and define it as follows: 47

“ Ineptocracy (in-ep-toc'-ra-cy) - a system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a diminishing number of producers.

48

49

50

Synonyms: Electile dysfunction. “ [SEDM Political Dictionary]

51

52

Requirement for Consent

258 of 396

Copyright Sovereignty Education and Defense Ministry, http://sedm.org Form 05.003, Rev. 7-23-2013

EXHIBIT:________