Meads v. Meads Read section IV to VI, fantastic summary about Freemen-on-The-Land and Sovereign Citizens.
Not sure what relevance that has on a thread about a historically based complaint about the police and surveillance state but it was interesting nonetheless.
Looks to me like the Court is pretty much peeved at folks doing poor-mans versions of the type of crap megacorps and elites get away with, in a nutshell.
Somehow I am not surprised you are sympathetic to Sovereign Citizens.
Sympathetic? Maybe a bit. Probably fairer to say I am unsympathetic towards a Canadian court having to deal with what they consider BS.
Mostly just lulzing though. People with actual social resources and legal education get away with ridiculous crap all the time, cant blame those with less for trying.
I can and do blame these people for trying to circumvent the rule of the law. Just because corporations sometimes get away with similar ridiculousness, doesn't make this crap any more justifiable.
Anarchy is when people make their own laws, and it always devolve to might makes it right. Fundamentally, this is what you are sympathetic to.
I encourage you to rethink your position on this.
Justifiable? Maybe not.
But still pretty funny, and low on the priority list. Whatever you think, they have a right to argue a position in court no matter how silly you think it is.
That some of the Court gets a tad exasperated really doesnt bug me much, they should stop setting such a bad example - and legislative bodies should reform the law to make it less convoluted and more comprehensible and consistent in general.