[Rndouglas]

So I was thinking about what true sovereignty is and also about the concept of a 'vagrant'. It occurred to me that he should still be sovereign, so how can these two concepts co-exist?

vagrancy n. moving about without a means to support oneself, without a permanent home, and relying on begging.

Until recently it was a considered a minor crime (misdemeanor) in many states. Yet Constitutionally it is evident that being poor is not a crime!

So what is going on here? Does a sovereign absolutely require a home?




At Common Law the term vagrant referred to a person who was idle, refused to work although capable of doing so, and lived on the charity of others. Until the 1970s state vagrancy statutes were used by police to charge persons who were suspected of criminal activity, but whose actions had not gone far enough to constitute a criminal attempt. Court decisions, however, have struck down vagrancy laws as unconstitutionally vague.

Traditionally, communities tended to regard vagrants with suspicion and view them either as beggars or as persons likely to commit crimes. In England vagrants were whipped, branded, conscripted into military service, or exiled to penal colonies. [NOT SOVEREIGN] In colonial America vagrancy statutes were common. A person who wandered into a town and did not find work was told to leave the community or face criminal prosecution.
Seems like such a heinous crime to assault someone and arrest their liberty for standing on land....for simply being.