These sovereign citizens are really thinking they found some sort of glitch in the system. “I dOnt rEcoGnize tHe goVERmEnT anD sOcieTY, I dIdnT siGn No soCiaL cOnTrAct buT I dO like yaLls LEctriCiTY”
It’s easy. Strip the wires before and after your electric meter, and attach jumper cables to either side.
It’s safe to do this with no protective equipment, just be sure to shout “I do not understand your intent” at the electricity first. That way it will be unable to fry you.
Sovereign citizens are hilariously entertaining. I love it when they post videos of themselves in court and decide on their own that they “won” because the judge got pissed off and walked away after dismissing everyone.
You just have to meet them on their crazy level. Make a treaty with them that says something along the lines of “I corporation yourname hereby certify that my neighbor corporation theirname is a freeman of the land in-exchange that our territory boundaries are respected”
depending on overall comfort and freedom desires, you/he could have a look on crimes that happened and how they would be prosecuted, quit renting contracts or sell, tell police one of the crimes was actually you/him and for some month/years the bills will vanish. when living in one of the most shitty countries of the world, police and court might be fully ok if they enprison an innocent anyway and you/he could help someone safe his (bad) ass.
not the expected answer? maybe just find a flat where street lights shine in all night and quit the utility contracts (or just don’t sign up) done: lights will stay on ;-)
maybe even better: help healing the world and help fixing politics and utility bills could vanish all over the world, all needed resources are ready available, it just needs a big fix of their distribution.
even though maybe weird, all of above ideas would work =D hope you/he choose no 3
It’s more a symptom of village idiots finding each other on the web and convincing themselves that they are not idiots. Its a feature of an interconnected world.
It makes sense when you realize they are truly stupid and have been taken in by a con. They get into situations they don’t understand, people say magic words they don’t understand and they get put in jail. Someone comes along and explains it in such a way only an idiot would believe about magic words and they want to get out. They don’t actually understand the words they are using or the context/concepts thar the words that are being used against them represent… And suddenly here we are.
They have the morality of an atomized corporation. Always trying to externalise costs to the rest of the planet. All that matters is their own short term needs.
I think they’re more a symptom of some people wanting to feel special. Everywhere has selfish people indignant that they have to pay for goods and/or services they use.
What exactly is the constitution, or any law, if not a social contract.
What exactly is a BDSM dungeon, if not a social contract?
What exactly is a thanksgiving dinner with the family, if not a social contract?
What exactly is a lemmy shitpost and a dipshit commenting on it, if not a social contract?
What exactly is a terms and conditions, if not a social contract?
What exactly is a terms of service, if not a social contract?
What exactly is a “please, harder daddy” if not a social contract?
My issue with “social contract” is how vague the concept is. I get that it’s an agreement we accept to have certain conditions met. But that definition itself is so vague why are we even discussing it?
<span style="color:#323232;">A usually implicit agreement among the members of an organized society or between the governed and the government defining and limiting the rights and duties of each.
</span>
Laws are explicit, not implicit. You said you didn’t understand what a social contract was and I answered you. Now you’re just being intentionally obtuse.
I never said anything of the sort. I said I didn’t understand the wording of the social contract. Please just link this one contract to me, since everyone’s always discussing it.
I can’t have a conversation unless I know the topic.
Topic like “agreement” is bit too vauge but hey, I’ll try: “Isn’t it great when everyone? I know, right?!”
And what benefit will me understanding the precursor to “agreements” grant me?
Folks keep thinking I don’t understand what a social contract is.
I don’t understand why such an old term is relevant when it can’t even be defined and is different for each person. The best we can come up with is something like “well, you do the things society wants and you get treated well”. Which one person will interpret as “I give food to the homeless, because they need food” and another person will interpret as “I don’t give food to the homeless because they need to understand the grind, they need to feel the hunger, it will motivate them to do better”. Both people obey “the social contract” yet, both are participating in opposite actions.
“The social contract” sounds a lot like “don’t be a dick” which, while nice sounding on the surface really needs clarification and this is why we have written contracts, governments, law, etc.
Sure, this wasn’t the case prior to law, but we have law now so…
You are right in that people seem to be misusing the term “social contract”. The actual definition is not vague, but broad. The point is that a person who wants to live in a society accepts its fundamental tenets as they exist in exchange for society at large letting it live amongst itself.
So one example of a social contract might be the one that the USSR and aligned countries’ societies had, which had the fundamental law of “things will continue to improve for you, but in exchange you must support our politics”. When things stopped improving, people stopped staying out of politics and the society collapsed and reformed.
As far as I understand, the US “social contract” is at least on the level of ideology that if you “pull yourself up by the bootstraps”, you get to “live the American Dream”. When they talk about people “rejecting the social contract”, what they mean is that they don’t think that they are getting what they want out of society at large. If it’s few people that do this, you get criminals and sovcits.
This theory is just to explain why people at large behave differently if they perceive their society as good, just, liveable, honourable and all manner of positive things.
Consider the sentiment of “If you saw someone steal from Walmart, you didn’t, but don’t steal from mom-and-pop shops, they need the money”.
People say this is because since Walmart is perceived as not adhering to the social contract by stealing wages, killing off small businesses and mooching off public money. That means that, unlike mom-and-pop shops, they are fair game and not dishonourable to steal from. Formal law still applies to them, you will go to jail if they catch you all the same, but society will not shun you. In a way if you break the “unwritten law”, then it does not protect you either.
As far as I understand, the US “social contract” is at least on the level of ideology that if you “pull yourself up by the bootstraps”, you get to “live the American Dream”. When they talk about people “rejecting the social contract”, what they mean is that they don’t think that they are getting what they want out of society at large. If it’s few people that do this, you get criminals and sovcits.
You’re probably right, emphasis on “probably” because the term is so vague we don’t really know what anyone who uses it really means. By the terms you’ve put forth, I too “reject the social contract” of “pulling yourself up by the bootstraps” allowing you to “live the american dream” on account of those words not having any real meaning. As an american, I can draw my own meaning from those words, but it will differ from the meaning others put on those words.
This theory is just to explain why people at large behave differently if they perceive their society as good, just, liveable, honourable and all manner of positive things.
And that’s the thing, because it’s different to each person, we’re all talking about different contracts, that we don’t understand but we assume about each other, causing difficulties in communication.
I’m happy to discuss law, constitution, policy, morality, etc… but discussing a “social contract” to me sounds like we’re just discussing the unspoken assumptions of others.
As for my social contracts, those who know, know, you know?
Do we all share the same contract? If yes, then does that mean we share the same morals? Does it take into account how people choose to live and which laws to break?
Can you speak english? Or, are you unable to try a real insult? You sound like you’re 4 years old. Did you get mommy and daddy’s permission to go on the internet today?
I may be a dumb pile of shit, but at least I can articulate my words. Please try doing the same.
Prior to castration surgery palpate the scrotum to ensure two descended testicles are present. Testes should be descended by 6-9 months of age. If not descended by 9-12 months of age, then the inguinal canal should be palpated to try and identify the cryptorchid testicles, and exploratory inguinal and/or abdominal surgery and testicular removal should be performed. Retention of inguinal or intra-abdominal (cryptorchid) testes increases testicular cancer risks. Within the context of CNR, you should consider where performing surgery to retrieve cryptorchid testes is a viable option in your project.
For the scrotal approach to castration, the scrotum must be aseptically prepared taking care not to damage the very sensitive skin. A sterile fenestrated drape should cover the aseptically prepared surgical site, with the testes visible through the fenestration and a sterile surgical kit opened in such a way so as to maintain sterility. Make a single bold incision on the ventral surface of the testicle through the skin and subcutaneous tissue, just lateral to the median raphe, approximately one third of the length of the testicle. Then follow an open or closed castration technique as described below.
For the pre-scrotal approach to castration, the caudal abdomen from the prepuce to the scrotum and surrounding areas to the medial thighs must be aseptically prepared taking care not to damage the skin. A sterile fenestrated drape should cover the aseptically prepared surgical site, and a sterile surgical kit opened in such a way so as to maintain sterility. The fenestrated opening of the surgical drape should be positioned between the prepuce and the scrotum, thereby covering the prepuce and scrotum to avoid contamination of the incision. Using the non-dominant hand, use pressure on the scrotum to push one testicle cranially into the pre-scrotal area. Make a single bold incision through the skin and subcutaneous tissue… Then follow an open or closed castration technique as described below.
Once the testes have been gently exteriorised, there are again two options as to how to proceed with castration – open or closed castration techniques. The open approach where the internal spermatic fascia is incised, and the closed approach where the internal spermatic fascia is not incised. The open technique provides direct visualisation of the spermatic cord and is less likely to result in suture slippage and hemorrhage, but requires opening the peritoneal cavity and thus the consequences of any infection may be more significant.
When performing the scrotal approach, it is not recommended that the scrotum is sutured. A single interrupted suture may be placed in the dartos fascia, otherwise invert the scrotal skin and leave it alone. A small amount of fluid drainage is normal. With the pre-scrotal approach, a standard three-layer closure should be performed. Close the dense fascial layer with either interrupted or continuous sutures, the subcutaneous tissue layer can be closed with a continuous suture pattern, and the skin layer closed using buried subcuticular or intradermal sutures.
I know what you’re doing. It’s just very strange to do it against someone who’s so similar to yourself. We’re basically the same person, I can just use my words.
You’re acting like how trump talks. Are you also a trumpist?
I figured as much. Are you the mod of athiest memes because you want to find young children to groom so that you can rape them? Please reply with an emoji to confirm, so I can post to your community.
So, while we’re both exploring the depths of lemmy’s comment thread, I guess I should get to know my little idiot. What’s your name? Do you hang around these parts often?
Which would you rather fight: 1 horse-sized duck or 1000 duck-sized horses and why?
It is an implied thing not a tangible written down thing. Which is common in life. For example you are sitting on a bus with your headphones on, it is understood that I don’t sit next to you and try to talk to you, unless something out of the ordinary happens and this is critical. In the grocery store you know that your cart goes on the same side of the aisle as you drive on.
All this stuff adds up and it becomes a basket of little rules. Follow them and things will go smoothly, don’t and they will go less smoothly. It doesn’t mean that your life is going to be even good it doesn’t mean nothing bad will happen to you it doesn’t mean everyone who breaks it will be punished. It is not even aspirational it is empirical. It is is how human civilization works.
Definitely not a cause. For a while they were a pain in the ass. Courts and lawyers didn’t know how to deal with them and they would keep coming back and back with appeals and collateral actions. Now there’s a whole playbook for disposing of their bullshit, doesn’t jam things up anymore.
It was originally a mail order scam targeting poor, uneducated people who were charged with crimes, desperate to believe any promise of help.
I know a lawyer about a decade ago who worked for a country government dealing with one. He told me that if the guy had 6 friend he could probably fully demolish the entire government of the county. They would be bankrupt from lawsuits, everyone would be afraid to do anything for fear of getting dragged in, nothing could get approved.
I don’t know if he was exaggerating or not but I think there is some truth to it. Things do seem to work only because no one has decided to stop it from working.
Maybe they rattled your friend. A while back a Canadian judge wrote an excellent legal opinion, that is more like a textbook, on who they are, where they came from, and how to deal with their arguments. It’s an amazing work of legal research and writing and actually made me sympathize with them. They are victims of a scam and desperate to escape the criminal justice system.
Add comment