[notthegov]

Larry Becraft Jr, an attorney who has fought the IRS, wrote in the 1990s on his website debunking these sovereign citizen theories-

http://home.hiwaay.net/~becraft/deadissues.htm

While I agree that these theories are ineffective and sometimes false, in a general sense they are true.

According to the US Code, the United States organic law is comprised of the Declaration of Independence(1776), the Articles of Confederation (1777), the Northwest Ordinance (1787) and the Constitution (1787). While mainstream academia says these have no legal or constitutional force, I'd disagree. In France, the organic law does have constitutional force and thus overrules statutes.

In essence, the United States is based on the natural rights acknowledge in the Declaration that says we have the "right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness". And any government whether, local, or state or national that diminishes these natural rights, we have a duty to alter or abolish them. This is the Right of Revolution, although the establishment would say this is now invalid since we have democratic methods to change the government.

Regardless, American rights pre-existed the Constitution, the government and the Declaration. Our rights are derived by the nature of our humanity and a natural "God" in the context of Deism, not religion.

And there are endless moderate abuses of the state; wholesale denials of civil rights, aggressive and unjust actions by judges, prosecutors and police. It's akin to Chinese water torture, a mild form of oppression that has a cumulative effect resulting in gangs, distrust between the public and the police and endless crimes.

[techsupporter]

> According to the US Code, the United States organic law is comprised of the [...] Constitution (1787). While mainstream academia says these have no legal or constitutional force, I'd disagree.

To be clear, you are stating that "mainstream academia" purports to hold that the "Constitution for the United States of America" does not have constitutional force? I find that more than a little hard to fathom.

(By the way, you do note that the Articles of Confederation were superseded by the Constitution through the acts of the state legislatures at the time and subsequent resolution of the Continental Congress, yes?)

[zyxley]

> In France, the organic law does have constitutional force and thus overrules statutes.

This may be a shocking revelation to you, but countries that aren't France aren't France.

[cbd1984]

> Larry Becraft Jr, an attorney who has fought the IRS

Becraft doesn't want to pay income tax and has developed some lunatic theories which, to his mind, allow him to not pay income tax. He's done time in prison because, surprise of surprises, his nutball theories don't change the actual law. He "fought the IRS" in much the same way as an ant might "fight" a ten-pound sledgehammer.

> According to the US Code, the United States organic law is comprised of the Declaration of Independence(1776), the Articles of Confederation (1777), the Northwest Ordinance (1787) and the Constitution (1787).

"Organic law" apparently does not mean what you think it means:

The Declaration of Independence does not have the force of law and it never has. It was a justification for the rebellion, and that's it.

The Articles of Confederation have not had the force of law since they were replaced by the Constitution, so saying they have force of law along with the Constitution is incoherent. The latter totally superseded the former.

The Northwest Ordinance was an act of the Congress under the Articles of Confederation which was subsequently recognized as valid law by the courts after the ratification of the Constitution. As an act of Congress, however, it can be modified by further acts of Congress and by the courts. It is not on an equal footing with the Constitution by any means.

> While mainstream academia says these have no legal or constitutional force, I'd disagree.

It isn't just the academics which disagree with you, but the government itself, and the government gets to decide what law is. You lose.