[johnuioyer]

Some good points brought up here. If you want to dispute information on where you are not maybe it is a good idea to know where you are?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-WFg5O3vB1s

[qCGfQR9T]

The 'State' is a mental construct. How can you live in a mental construct, if it is not your own? Simply by agreeing to it. So you must avoid being tricked into agreeing that you live in, say, the State of Arizona. If you deny consent to the jurisdiction of the state, by not agreeing to it, are you obligated to explain what you are doing in what they consider their jurisdiction? Could you claim that you live in your own mental construct called a Sovereign on the land? And that you abide by a superior set of laws than the ones 'governing the State of Arizona'?

The short answer to your question is that you live in your own mental construct, not theirs. And because you don't agree to be governed by their laws, you don't have to. If you lived in Phoenix, would you agree to obey the laws of France? Or Egypt? Well, why would you agree to allow the State of Arizona to judge you. Those laws may be just as foreign to you as those of Egypt or France.

Hatha

[johnuioyer]

The 'State' is a mental construct. How can you live in a mental construct, if it is not your own? Simply by agreeing to it.

You have most likely heard that ignorance of the law is no excuse. Except you need to consider what ignorance of the law actually is.

So you must avoid being tricked into agreeing that you live in, say, the State of Arizona. If you deny consent to the jurisdiction of the state, by not agreeing to it, are you obligated to explain what you are doing in what they consider their jurisdiction?

Most likely the state officials will be interested in whose jurisdiction you agree participate in. There is a concept called "local allegiance" when an alien visits foreign territory by which your physical presence is tacit admission you agree to follow the local laws. These prohibitions might be such things as wearing a scarf (if female) in Arab countries, avoiding drinking, not running around in the buff, not point the sole of your shoel at others and so on.

Could you claim that you live in your own mental construct called a Sovereign on the land? And that you abide by a superior set of laws than the ones 'governing the State of Arizona'?

Sovereigns settle their disputes by going to war. If this is "you" then you must be prepared to live (or die) with the consequences. Some classifications come with problems.

[Leczyslaw]

Sovereigns settle their disputes by going to war. If this is "you" then you must be prepared to live (or die) with the consequences. Some classifications come with problems.

This is true. The Principality of Hutt River declared war with Australia. I think hostilities existed for 48 hours then Peace was declared. This provided some avenue for sanctuary under UN conventions. I can't recall the exact specifics of that but it was to do with protecting lands that had previously been subject to hostilities. It boxed the Australian government in so they could not retaliate against the principality. The story is on their web site somewhere. The specifics might be worth adding to this thread at some point.