The Off Topic Topic

[garbon]

It is true though;  the more you grow it out and shave it, the thicker it grows back in. 

No, stop spreading falsehoods.

[CountDeMoney]

Don't want to hear shit from you, Mr. I Can Do So Many Neat Things With My Hair.

[garbon]

Don't want to hear shit from you, Mr. I Can Do So Many Neat Things With My Hair.

Gotta have some advantages.

[Ed Anger]

My beard is thick and luscious. And totally gray on my chin.

ALL HAIL THE FLAVOR SAVER! MUSTACHE RIDES $5.

[dps]

I like having a goatee;  it makes my face look longer and therefore a bit thinner, whereas having a full beard just make me look fatter.

[11B4V]

Hipsters

[Josquius]

Today I've been reading about the freemen on the land conspiracy.
Any lawyers encountered them?

[Malthus]

Today I've been reading about the freemen on the land conspiracy.
Any lawyers encountered them?

No, but an Alberta judge wrote a whole damn essay on them in a judgment after encountering one. 

https://www.canlii.org/en/ab/abqb/doc/2012/2012abqb571/2012abqb571.html

It is huge, but it can easily be summarized as follows:

[71]           OPCA strategies as brought before this Court have proven disruptive, inflict unnecessary expenses on other parties, and are ultimately harmful to the persons who appear in court and attempt to invoke these vexatious strategies. Because of the nonsense they argue, OPCA litigants are invariably unsuccessful and their positions dismissed, typically without written reasons. Nevertheless, their litigation abuse continues. The growing volume of this kind of vexatious litigation is a reason why these Reasons suggest a strong response to curb this misconduct.

[72]           Beyond that, these are little more than scams that abuse legal processes. As this Court now recognizes that these schemes are intended for that purpose, a strict approach is appropriate when the Court responds to persons who purposefully say they stand outside the rules and law, or who intend to abuse, disrupt, and ultimately break the legal processes that govern conduct in Canada. The persons who advance these schemes, and particularly those who market and sell these concepts as commercial products, are parasites that must be stopped.

[73]           A critical first point is an appreciation that the concepts discussed in these Reasons are frequently a commercial product, designed, promoted, and sold by a community of individuals, whom I refer to as "gurus". Gurus claim that their techniques provide easy rewards – one does not have to pay tax, child and spousal support payments, or pay attention to traffic laws. There are allegedly secret but accessible bank accounts that contain nearly unlimited funds, if you know the trick to unlock their gates. You can transform a bill into a cheque with a stamp and some coloured writing. You are only subject to criminal sanction if you agree to be subject to criminal sanction. You can make yourself independent of any state obligation if you so desire, and unilaterally force and enforce demands on other persons, institutions, and the state. All this is a consequence of the fact gurus proclaim they know secret principles and law, hidden from the public, but binding on the state, courts, and individuals.

[74]           And all these "secrets" can be yours, for small payment to the guru.

[75]           These claims are, of course, pseudolegal nonsense. A judge who encounters and reviews OPCA concepts will find their errors are obvious and manifest, once one strips away the layers of peculiar language, irrelevant references, and deciphers the often bizarre documentation which accompanies an OPCA scheme. When reduced to their conceptual core, most OPCA concepts are contemptibly stupid. Mr. Meads, for example, has presented the Court with documents that appear to be a contract between himself, and himself. One Mr. Meads promises to pay for any liability of the other Mr. Meads. One owns all property, the other all debts. What is the difference between these entities? One spells his name with upper case letters. The other adds spurious and meaningless punctuation to his name. Mr. Meads (with punctuation) is the Mr. Meads who appeared in court. He says the Mr. Meads (all capitals) is the one who should pay child and spousal support.

[76]           So where is that Mr. Meads (all capitals)? At one point in the June 8 hearing Mr. Meads said that Mr. Meads (all capitals) was a "corporate entity" attached to his birth certificate. Later, he told me that the other Mr. Meads was a "person" - and that I had created him! Again, total nonsense.

[77]           The bluntly idiotic substance of Mr. Mead's argument explains the unnecessarily complicated manner in which it was presented. OPCA arguments are never sold to their customers as simple ideas, but instead are byzantine schemes which more closely resemble the plot of a dark fantasy novel than anything else. Latin maxims and powerful sounding language are often used. Documents are often ornamented with many strange marking and seals. Litigants engage in peculiar, ritual‑like in court conduct. All these features appear necessary for gurus to market OPCA schemes to their often desperate, ill‑informed, mentally disturbed, or legally abusive customers. This is crucial to understand the non-substance of any OPCA concept or strategy. The story and process of a OPCA scheme is not intended to impress or convince the Courts, but rather to impress the guru's customer.

[78]           Mediaeval alchemy is a helpful analogue. Alchemists sold their services based on the theatre of their activities, rather than demonstrated results, or any analytical or systematic methodology. OPCA gurus are modern legal alchemists. They promise gold, but their methods are principally intended to impress the gullible, or those who wish to use this drivel to abuse the court system. Any lack of legal success by the OPCA litigant is, of course, portrayed as a consequence of the customer's failure to properly understand and apply the guru's special knowledge.

[79]           Caselaw that relates to Gurus, reviewed below, explains how gurus present these ideas in seminars, books, websites, and instructional DVDs and other recordings. They provide pre‑prepared documents, which sometimes are government forms, and instruct how to fill in the necessary information that then produces the desired effects. Gurus write scripts to follow in court. Some will attempt to act as your representative, and argue your case.

[80]           When gurus do appear in court their schemes uniformly fail, which is why most leave court appearances to their customers. That explains why it is not unusual to find that an OPCA litigant cannot even explain their own materials. They did not write them. They do not (fully) understand them. OPCA litigants appear, engage in a court drama that is more akin to a magic spell ritual than an actual legal proceeding, and wait to see if the court is entranced and compliant. If not, the litigant returns home to scrutinize at what point the wrong incantation was uttered, an incorrectly prepared artifact waved or submitted.

[Barrister]

Today I've been reading about the freemen on the land conspiracy.
Any lawyers encountered them?

Yes. 

They're very, very tiring to deal with.

[Malthus]

Today I've been reading about the freemen on the land conspiracy.
Any lawyers encountered them?

Yes. 

They're very, very tiring to deal with.

Heh makes sense that a prosecutor would deal with them more than a regulatory lawyer. 

I assume you've seen the above judgment. It's a classic.

[Razgovory]

I don't think my dad is going to make it through this last illness.  Doctor's haven't been able to get him out the medically induced coma.  He will need to lose a foot and he has pneumonia.

[The Larch]

Really sorry to hear that, Raz...

[jimmy olsen]

I don't think my dad is going to make it through this last illness.  Doctor's haven't been able to get him out the medically induced coma.  He will need to lose a foot and he has pneumonia.

So sorry to hear this. God bless you and your family Raz.

[Ed Anger]

They made a Brexit porno. WOTS ALL THIS THEN?

[Valmy]

I don't think my dad is going to make it through this last illness.  Doctor's haven't been able to get him out the medically induced coma.  He will need to lose a foot and he has pneumonia.

Sorry Raz