I know cops and other government employees operate under the presumption/claim that if I’m physically in New York (or wherever), then the laws of state (government) apply to me and there is jurisdiction over me.
Can any LEO’s provide any evidence to support this claim? By evidence I mean relevant facts, not legal opinions, legal citations and arguments.
Prosecutors impeach their own witnesses so fast, because cops make legal determinations/claims everyday and they have no evidence. They’ll claim they don’t need evidence, which is probably why prosecutors object on cross-examination claiming their star witness is not competent to make legal determinations. Such admissions are really damaging to one’s case and perception of fairness.
Because we’re supposed to believe when a cop says you are violating the law he is not making a legal determination. We’re not all as stupid and lacking in critical thinking skills as they think.
So when you’re preparing to defend against an attack in court, know they have no evidence, that the applicability of their rules (jurisdiction) is their Achilles’ Heel. So much so that prosecutors will impeach their own witness.
But always remember: cops are armed and extremely dangerous, do not speak to them unless they are on the witness stand. They do not like being challenged, we’re considered “a threat to officer safety” for asking questions.
GET TO KNOW know supreme court rulings and specific USC titles to back it up.
learn the difference between legal citations, argument and evidence. I do not refuse to accept any answer, I accept a responsive answer to the question.
The ‘my house my rules’ argument
Where did said government (just people) get the authority to claim that this temperate part of North America belonged to them?
how did they come to ‘own it’
where did they get the assumed right to make rules for everyone else
How did the landmass in the pacific northwest (for example) become (assumed) a state in 1889?
Because someone with guns said so.
Further, states and Countries are fictions, in fact they do not even meet the criteria of abstractions, they are as imaginary as Leprechauns (no offense to Leprechauns)
A real human being cannot be “within” an imaginary place, so there can be no residents or citizens.
And, even if there is an attempt towards a valid social contract, there can be no consent with a gun in the room, otherwise the rapists could claim consent from the victim.