I serve Constructive Notice rather than show a 'permit' to carry!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Aug 19, 2003
Messages
177
Location
The entity known as me!
The following is a copy of the CONSTRUCTIVE NOTICE that I serve any LEO's if stopped and questioned about carrying a weapon in the open.

Cover page: Definition of Constructive Notice, Black's Law Dictionary, 3rd Edition, page 1258, "Constructive Notice is information or knowledge of a fact imputed by law to a person; (although he may not actually have it) because he could have discovered the fact by proper diligence, and his situation was such as to cast upon him the duty of inquiring into it. Constructive Notice is a presumption of law, making it impossible for one to deny the matter concerning which notice is given."
I have been served this Constructive Notice by the Human Being known as Winston Ward Johnson, I have read it and understand the possible consequences of any further violations of his right to bear arms and/or security from any unlawful search or seizure. Dated Signed Witnessed

Page 2: CONSTRUCTIVE NOTICE, To any and all Law Enforcement Personnel, State Police, County Sheriff/Deputies, City Police, This is Constructive Notice that the Human Being known as Winston Ward Johnson in the exercise of his Natural, Absolute, Inherent and Inalienable Rights and of which he has the reasonable expectation are protected by both the Constitution for the united States of America and the various State Constitutions does lawfully carry on and/or about his being weapons expressly for the purpose of self-defense, to wit: BILL OF RIGHTS, KENTUCKY'S CONSTITUTION, 1891: Section 1: All men are, by nature, free and equal, and have certain and inalienable rights ...... FIRST: The right of enjoying and defending their lives and liberties. FIFTH: The right of acquiring and protecting property. SEVENTH: The right to bear arms in defense of themselves and the State ...... Section 2: Absolute and arbitrary power over the lives, liberty and property of freemen exists nowhere in a republic, not even in the largest majority.

Page 3: Section 10: The people shall be secure in their houses, papers and possessions, from unreasonable search and seizure; and no warrant shall issue to search any place, or seize any person or thing, without probable cause supported by oath or affirmation. Section 26: "To guard against transgression of the high powers which we have delegated, We Declare that every thing in this Bill of Rights is excepted out of the general powers of government, and shall forever remain inviolate; and all laws contrary thereto, or contrary to this Constitution, shall be void.
As public officials you have sworn an oath to support those Constitutions and you are presumed to be acting in 'good faith', however if you now violate any of my Natural, Absolute, Inherent and Inalienable Rights you will be acting in 'bad faith' and therefore will lose your 'good faith immunity'! You can and will be held personally liable for your unlawful actions! Dated July 15, 2002 Winston Ward Johnson, a Freeman, Sui Juris

This is the Constructive Notice that my youngest son, Winston served deputy Darrell Ford of the Monroe County Sheriff's Department on July 11, 2003 when he was confronted by deputy Ford about carrying a pistol in the open in the city of Tompkinsville, Kentucky. I will post my son's complaint that he filed with Jerry Gee, Sheriff of Monroe County, Kentucky for deputy Ford's unlawful actions shortly. This 'incident' happened on a Friday evening, I travelled 400 miles one way on Sunday to meet with Jerry Gee on Monday to deal with this problem, I'll post the rest of the story later.
 
Way to deep for me!!!

That was way to deep for me. Did anyone else have trouble concentrating while reading that? Too much "legal speak" for me
 
suijurisfreeman ... And what exactly are your thoughts as you are cuffed and sitting in the back seat on your way downtown?:neener:
 
Nothing too deep here, just using Kentucky's Bill of Rights to protect our Natural, Absolute, Inherent and Inalienable right of self-defense! Jerry Gee, Sheriff of Monroe County, Kentucky admitted at our meeting on Monday, July 14th that deputy Darrell Ford had absolutely NO 'reasonable suspicion' to do a 'stop and frisk' let alone 'probable cause' to do an actual search! Jerry Gee spoke with deputy Ford, my son Winston met with Jerry Gee and Darrell Ford on Thursday, July 17th and deputy Ford apologized to my son for his unlawful actions! NO flight of fancy here, Constructive Notice actually works, but you've got to know how to use it!
 
I would imagine that after reading that he arrested your son and will let the DA sift through your letter.
 
My son was not arrested, he was 'allowed' to leave, with his weapon, and he filed a complaint with Jerry Gee, Sheriff of Monroe County, Kentucky. Deputy Darrell Ford was told in no uncertain terms that what my son was doing (carrying a Glock 23 in the open) was protected by Kentucky's Bill of Rights and that my son was 'carrying lawfully'! Section 1, No. 7 of Kentucky's Bill of Rights ABSOLUTELY guarantees this RIGHT!
 
A couple of points.

1. Laws are interpreted and applied by the courts, not by your or my opinion of what they mean. Constitutions, whether Federal or State, are also subject to interpretation by the courts. Rights and freedoms recognized in these instruments are subject to regulation, whether we like it or not. So, to insist on a "purist" interpretation and application of the applicable clauses is a losing case from the start... just look at all the court rulings that confirm this.

2. I'm not happy AT ALL with posts which imply that we can flout the existing laws, regulations and binding legal precedents that control us day by day. We can certainly work to have these changed or overturned, in a legal, constitutional way: but this is far different from being a "scofflaw".

Please remember that we take The High Road in all things. This includes respect for the law: and if the law is not deserving of respect, our approach should be to work for its amendment or removal, not to advocate illegal flouting of laws that could get our members imprisoned for doing so.

Please keep this in mind in future posts. This is your moderator speaking! :p :D
 
Preacherman,
Here's some 'court rulings' for you,

"Where rights recured by the Constitution are involved ther can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them." Miranda vs. Arizona, 384 US 436, page 491

"All laws repugnant to the Constitution are null and void." Marbury vs. Madison, 5 US (2 Cranch) 137, 174, 176 (1803)

"An unconstitutional act is not law, it affords no protection; it creates no office; it is legal contemplation, as inoperative as though it had never been passed." Norton ve. Shelby, 118 US 425, page 442

"The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and name of law, is in reality no law, but is wholly void, and ineffective for any purpose; since unconstitutionality dates from the time of its' enactment, and not merely from the date of the decision so branding it....no one is bound to obey unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it." 16 Am Jur 2nd, Sec. 177, late 2nd, Sec. 256
 
Zak Smith,
The purpose of Constructive Notice is to overcome the LEO's presumption of 'acting in good faith', go back and reread Black's Law Dictionary definition of Constructive Notice, "Constructive Notice is a presumption of law, making it IMPOSSIBLE for one to deny the matter concerning which notice is given."

It's not a matter of being 'legal', IT'S A RIGHT, a right that's protected by Kentucky's Bill of Rights, Section 1, No. 7 and Section 26.

"All men are, by nature, FREE and equal, and have CERTAIN and INALIENABLE RIGHTS .....

Section 1, No. 7: "The right to bear arms in defense of themselves and the State ....

Section 26: "To guard against transgression of the high powers which we have delegated, We Declare that EVERY THING in this Bill of Rights is EXCEPTED OUT OF THE GENERAL POWERS OF GOVERNMENT, and shall FORVEVER remain INVIOLATE; and ALL laws contrary thereto, or contrary to this Constitution, shall BE VOID."

Once Constructive Notice has been served, there is absolutely NO excuse for the LEO's violating my right to carry in the open as protected by Kentucky's Bill of Rights! If he does, as a matter of law he loses his 'good faith immunity' and he can now be personally sued for his unlawful actions!
 
Zak Smith,
My son was 'detained' by deputy Ford for absolutley NO lawful reason, you tell me what was his 'excuse'? I'll tell you why, because he told my son, "I'm a Sheriff's deputy, you do what I tell you!" "You're being 'cocky', if you don't stop being 'cocky' you're going to jail!" All my son did was serve deputy Ford Constructive Notice that he was in fact exercising a right that he had the reasonable expectation was protected by Kentucky's Bill of Rights - the RIGHT to carry a weapon in the open! Sheriff, Jerry Gee admitted to us that deputy Ford had absolutely NO lawful reason to detain my son, that's why my son got an apology from deputy Ford! If Jerry Gee had not resolved this matter as he did, assault charges would have been filed against deputy Ford and a Title 42 lawsuit would have been filed against deputy Ford, Jerry Gee, Monroe County, and the Monroe County Fiscal Court for a violation of my son's right to carry in the open which is protected by Kentucky's Bill of Rights. I can and probably will post another case in which I served the Monroe County Fiscal Court Constructive Notice because they attempted to take a portion of my property for a road right-of-way through what they termed 'adverse possession', which by the way is a violation of both the Federal Constitution and Kentucky's Constitution which prohibits the taking of private property without just compensation.

Once Constructive Notice is served, there is NO longer any 'good faith immunity', because you have already informed them that what they are doing is in fact a violation of the Bill of Rights, Constitution or a 'law'. They therefore can not 'hide' behind their immunity! To legally sue one of these public servants you must first overcome their 'good faith immunity' - that's the purpose of Constructive Notice!
 
I respect your position, but this seems as fruitful as refusing to pay income tax; if I tried this in Massachusetts I'd be hanged from the yardarm.
 
Devonai,
What are you saying? That exercising an inherent and inalieanable right is 'fruitless'? That public officials haven't sworn an oath to support and obey the Constitution? That the Bill of Rights and Constitution aren't worth the paper they're written on? Who is the master and who is the servant here?

Let me quote you Alabama's Bill of Rights, Article I, Section 35: "The sole object and only legitimate end of government is to protect the citizen in the enjoyment of life, liberty, and property, and when the government assumes other functions it is usurpation and oppression."

The people of this country must come to understand the true relationship between themselves and their government. The people are the sovereigns, all political power in inherent in the people, the people only delegated a limited portion of their sovereign power to their government through their Constitution. Government is the 'agent' of the people, not their master!
 
Im with Preacher...

and to suijurisfreeman, you are absolutely correct that an unconstituional law is no law at all..

Who decides...you? Sorry to tell you this its the Courts who decide...

and until then....

WildobeythelawtillyachangethelawAlaska
 
Preacherman,
Here's some breif quotes from 'Our Government', The American Legion, Department of Michigan, 1963, 26th printing, page 9: "INTRODUCTION, The American System. The more complex a civilization becomes, the greater the need for government. Complexity and advancement should not be confused, however. The higher a civilization advances, in per capita intellignece and spiritual consciousness, the truer the statement, 'The least governed are the best governed.'

page 11: "Government in Michigan is typical of the American system. Michigan has been a state since 1836; while there have been many changes and developments in the detailed methods of applying our system o f government, the system itself remains fundamentally the same as originally conceived. The people are still sovereign; the Constitution still challenges any who wouyld trespass individual rights or exceed the bounds of authority."

page 12: "Nothing is more vital to you and me than our personal freedom. No part of the Constitution is more important than the Bill of Rights, which safeguards that freedom of worship, liberty of speech and of press, right of trial by jury, protection against unreasonable searches and seizures and the other recognized guarantees of individual freedom. As long as the Bill of Rights remains effective, our liberties are secure."

page 13: "Our laws are of three kinds, listed in the order of their superiorty. 1. Constitutional 2. Statutory 3. 'The Common Law'. As has already been shown, Constitutional Law is the fundamental law. It is contained in a single document comparatively brief in words but broad in aspect. It declares principles rather than practices. It is concerned with doctrine rather than details. It is the foundation upon which the whole structure of our government rests. While constitutional law is capable of change, changes come slowly and this is to be desired; it is a protection against whim and caprice."

to be continued
 
I agree with you 100%! However, one must consider the political situation of their environment. I reiterate my initial conclusion; such an attempt in my area would have negative results, to say the least.
 
Interpretation

Courts of Law, i.e. State Supreme Courts, The Supreme Court of the United States, interpret laws, Bills of Rights, Constitutions and other matters open for interpretation. And there are very few, if any, documents that are not subject to interpretation.

If your "Constructive Notice" did anything, what it did was blind those poor backward country cops with the southbound product of a northbound bull. I can see them now, scratching their heads saying, "What the hell was that he just showed us?". "I don't know but it sure sounded sounded high-falutin'!" "I guess we'd better get Elmer over't courthouse to have a look at it."

If it worked more power to you. I wouldn't feel real good about trying it where I'm from. And, by the way, I mean no disrespect to you or your law enforcement agency. I'm as country as they come. Heck, when I was a kid we made one trip a year to Mayberry to buy school clothes and see the pictureshow. Done it right after we kilt the hogs.

Just my two cents worth...

Buck
 
I like the spirit. But a piece of paper (a document) hand delivered is not constructive notice. It is notice de jure, or actual notice. Nice though - KUTGW!
 
Wildalaska,
Kentucky's Bill of Rights, Constitution is the FUNDAMENTAL LAW of that Commonwealth, ALL 'laws' are required to conform to that FUNDAMENTAL LAW! Kentucky's Bill of Rights, Section 1, No. 7: "The right to bear arms in defense of themselves and the State, subject to the power of the General Assembly to enact laws to prevent persons from carrying concealed weapons." I DO NOT carry concealed, I carry in the OPEN, this right is protected by Section 1, No. 7 of Kentucky's Bill of Rights!
 
Futo Inu,
Black's Law Dictionary, 3rd Edition, page 1258, Classification, Notice is actual or constructive. Actual notice has been defined as notice expressly and actually given, and brought home to the party directly ....... The term 'actual notice,' however, is generally given a wider meaning as embracing two classes, express and implied; the former includes all knowledge of a degree above that which depends upon collateral inference, or which imposes upon the party the further duty of inquiry; the latter imputes knowledge to the party because he is shown to be conscious of having the means of knowledge. In this sense actual notice is such notice as is positively proved to have been given to a party directly and personally, or such as he is presumed to have received personally because the evidence within his knowledge was sufficient to put him upon inquiry ......

I'll have to think about the heading of my 'Constructive Notice', at the time I printed it up I wondered if maybe 'Actual Notice' would be more appropriate, I'm not a 'lawyer', so I'm not versed in 'legalize'! But I do know that it does in fact work because I've used it numerous times and wayward public officials seem to run for cover when I do! :D

What's KUTGW?
 
A lil' accellerant perhaps?:evil:

Seriously though, the guy makes sense, did his homework, posted his documentation references, and prevailed in practical application...

Well done Sir.

Now you other guys make sense too, don't get me wrong (for all practical purposes, living in the shadow of an intimidating Government.) But ummm, for the sake of the listening audiance and the lesser well read ones, could someone post the documentation of your refutation to him that its the court that has first and final say? Pretty please?:D :D

I'm not familier with that section of law, you see. I've heard of juries being able to determine the legality of laws, but I'm a little grey on just where the courts become absolute over us, except in capital crimes and violations of the NAP.

Good debate, but lets not let fear enter into the debate. Remain factual and referenced...Anybody got that link that legally refutes him?:D
 
Edward429451,

As a matter of fact according to Indiana's Bill of Rights, Article I, Section 19: "Right of jury to determine LAW AND FACTS in criminal cases." Indiana is one of the FEW States that includes this in their Bill of Rights! This certainly isn't what judges would have us believe now is it?! :D

Freedom is contagious! Knowledge is the source of infection, infect knowledge! :D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top