Richard McDonald's
Seminar on state
Citizenship

I'm involved in a political movement to restore
state's rights, and state Citizenship. I'm involved in 19 states right now,
teaching citizenship. I'm involved in approximately 40 states teaching common
law, and with people that I'm assisting.

I have a court case that says I have a right to go
to any state in the Union to teach Citizens the law. I have another court case
that says it is my absolute duty to protect my republican form of government.
How do I protect my republican form of government? By teachin  you the law.
So, combining those two court cases, they can't stop me.

Every Patriot group out there has been raided --
except the Citizens groups. None of the Citizens have been raided. The district
attorney has been asked questions about state Citizenship. The district attorney
researched it and says that "yes, it is a legal thing to do."

This document you're getting is the Soldier's
Training Manual of 1928. The government used to give training manuals to
soldiers, teaching them that democracy was evil, in a republican form of
government. One column gives the definition of democracy, as it was defined
in1928. President Roosevelt had all these training manuals destroyed so that he
could institute a democracy. That's his New Deal -- communism.

Democracy and communism are identical twin
brothers. Look at the communist manifesto, look at what's happening here under
democracy, and you'll see that all the planks are identical.

The next page is one of the first cases I found
while I was researching Citizenship. I want you to read the top paragraph and
tell me if you are a U.S. citizen.

No white person born within the limits
of the United States and subject to their jurisdiction, or born without those
limits and subsequently naturalized under their laws, owes his status of
citizenship to the recent amendments to the Federal Constitution.
Van Valkenburg v. Brown,
43 Cal 43.

You have to remember the 14th amendment is not law,
it's never been passed, not ratified. So when you claim you are a U.S. citizen,
you claim that you're a little green man from Mars with six heads; and that's
the way the court looks at you, a dummy that doesn't know what he's talking
about.

And how did you become a U.S. citizen? When you got
your social security number. What you have now is the original social security
act of 1935. I'd like you to read the top paragraph, and tell me where that
trust fund is that they're talking about on television and radio. You hear them
say, "give us your money, we'll keep it in the trust fund". Read what it says:

AN
ACT To provide for the general welfare by establishing a system of
Federal old-age benefits, and by enabling the several States to make more
adequate provision for aged persons, blind persons, dependent and crippled
children, maternal and child welfare, public health, and the administration of
their unemployment compensation laws; to establish a Social Security Board; to
raise revenue; and for other purposes.

It's for revenue raising, and other purposes. There
is no trust fund. Everything you give to the government is for revenue purposes.
They do not have to pay you anything in Social Security. It's a gratuity given
by government. It can be abolished, and taken away tomorrow. That's what the
courts have ruled, many times.

And when you've got your social security number you
said " I want some welfare, I want some workmen's comp, I want, I want, I want
... and you have my power of attorney to regulate and control me. I'm a
fictitious entity. I'm not a human being anymore."

When you do that, you give the federal government
power of attorney. Then the government gives it to their courts. You become a
ward of the court. So, read what a ward of the court is:

Wards of court. Infants and persons ofunsound mind
... Their rights must be guarded jealously ...
Black's[Law Dictionary],
Fifth Edition.

His [attorney] first duty is to the
courts and the public, not to the client, and whenever the duties to his
client conflict with those he owes as an officer of the court in the
administration of justice, the former must yield to the latter.
Corpus
Juris Secundum, 1980 Ed.

Clients are also called "wards of the court" in regard to their
relationship with their attorneys.
Corpus Juris Secundum, 1980
Ed.

Nobody here looks like an imbecile or and infant to
me, but you claim you are, and the courts recognize you as such. That's why you
have to have an attorney.

And when you became a U.S. citizen, you became a
citizen of the United States government. Now read what the United States
government is:

The United States government is a
foreign corporation with respect to a state.
In re Merriam, 163 US
625.

Ninety-nine percent of the time when they say
small 's state, they're referring to the common law republic country. A capital
'S' State is a corporation. Large 'S"  means corporation, fiction; small
's' means land mass, country.

Next is California Government Code section 242.
Remember, as a U.S. citizen, you are a citizen of the District of Columbia. Is
the District of Columbia a state of the Union? No. Now, you tell me under
California law what you are, either (a) or (b):

Persons in the State not its citizens
are either:

(a) Citizens of other States; or
(b)
Aliens.

You're alien to California! Key words: Alien,
resident, foreigner, franchisee, they all mean the same thing. The laws are very
specific, and they tell you up front. A "person" fits in the same category.

Next is the 1866 Civil Rights Act, and after you
read that, I have a question for you:

CHAP
XXXI -- An Act to protect all Persons in the United States in their
Civil Rights, and furnish the Means of their Vindication.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United
States of America in Congress assembled, That all persons born in the United
States and not subject to any foreign power, excluding Indians not taxed, are
hereby declared to be citizens of the United States; and such citizens, of
every race and color, without regard to any previous condition of slavery or
involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party
shall have been duly convicted, shall have the same right, in every State and
Territory in the United States, to make and enforce contracts, to sue, be
parties, and give evidence, to inherit, purchase, lease, sell, hold, and
convey real and personal property, and to full and equal benefit of all laws
and proceedings for the security of person and property, as is enjoyed by
white citizens, and shall be subject to like punishment, pains and penalties,
and to none other, any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, to the
contrary notwithstanding.

My question is: Can you be this "person" and a
Citizen at the same time?

No? Good! Because read what the court said in
1979:

Upon introducing the provisions which
eventually became 18 USC 242, its sponsor, Senator Stewart, explicitly stated
that the bill protected all "persons" ... He noted that the bill "simply
extends to foreigners, not citizens, the protection of our laws."
United States v.
Otherson, 480 FSupp 1369, 1373.

Rights under [civil rights act] are for citizens of United States and not
of state.
Wadleigh v.
Newhall, 136 F 941.

All federal law only protects persons, aliens and
foreigners, not Citizens. Federal law can't protect you if you're not subject to
it. The laws of Japan can't protect  me -- I'm not subject to them.

As a U.S. citizen, you have civil rights. I, as a
state Citizen have no civil rights whatsoever. I have sovereign rights. God gave
me my rights, the government gives me nothing. I am outside of their scope and
all of their authority.

The next is an 1829 court case. Our Founding
Fathers fought England, kicked England out, and went to France to sign the
Treaty of Peace. The King of England relinquished all of his sovereign
authority, and all of his God-given kingly rights to the People. That's when it
used to be a man was "king of his own home", when we were state Citizens:

People of a state are entitled to all
rights which formerly belonged to the king by his prerogative.
Lansing v.
Smith, 21 D 89.

Next we come to 1906, Kansas v. Colorado. I want
you to go to the law library and xerox the whole court case.  The federal
government recognizes that there are three sovereigns; We the People, the state
government, and  the federal government. Remember that We, the People were
state Citizens. People are not "persons". I'm not a "person", I'm people. A
legal distinction. I may be a person figuratively speaking, but in law, I'm not
a  "person".

Now we jump to 1986:

[i]n our country the people are
sovereign and the government cannot sever its relationship to the people by
taking away their citizenship.  ... a United States citizen possesses a
constitutional right to remain a citizen ... unless he voluntarily
relinquishes that citizenship.
Richards v. Secty. of
State, 752 F2d 1418.

So people have a right to remain a Citizen unless
they voluntarily relinquish it. What happened when you voluntarily relinquished
it? You got your Social Security number! Didn't you ask for your civil rights? A
civil right is a right given, regulated, controlled, and taxed by the agency
that granted it. The only one who gave me my rights is God. God is my
government, personally, according to the Bible. I obey my government.

[Question] I'm trying to understand "people"
versus  "person".

The law is very distinct. Persons are not people.
"We, the People" wrote the Constitution. They were state Citizens. "Persons"
came along under the 14th amendment.

Everybody wants to talk about the income tax. I
happen to like this court case. It's a very clear definition of the income tax:

An income tax is neither a property tax,
nor a tax on occupations of common right, but is an excise tax.
Sims
v. Ahrens, 271 SW 720 (1925).

An income tax is an excise tax. What is an excise
tax? You buy a wristwatch, you pay an excise tax. You buy tires for your
automobile, you pay an excise tax. You put gas in your motor vehicle, you pay an
excise tax. Anything you do not need can be taxed under an excise tax: You buy
food and clothing, you don't have to pay an excise tax. Those are items of
necessity. And all the courts have ruled that U.S. citizenship is a privilege,
it's not a right.

You have a right to be a state Citizen. It is a
privilege to be a U.S. citizen.

Next is a 1924 court case, Cook vs. Tate. Let me
explain this case for you. Mr. Cook went down to Mexico City. There, he opened
up a business and earned some money. The Bureau of Internal Revenue came down
and said, "hey, you owe us some money." Cook said "no I don't! I didn't earn any
money from the United States. I earned it all down here."

He paid the tax under protest, and appealed it all
the way to the Supreme Court. The Court ruled that the United States government
has a right to tax its citizens wherever they are resident. Keyword: resident.

My father paid no income tax in 1924, because he
was a state Citizen. He didn't begin paying income tax until he got his Social
Security number, when he became a "resident", in 1941.

This next is the second court case that started
me  thinking:

Citizenship of the United States does
not entitle citizen to privileges and immunities of citizen of state, since
privileges and immunities of one are not the same as the other.
K. Tashiro v. Jordan, 256
P 545 (1927).

Why are they different? State Citizens are not
subject to federal law. They have sovereign immunity. U.S. citizens are subject
to just about everything -- even the local dogcatcher!

Then I found:

Both before and after the Fourteenth
Amendment to the federal Constitution, it has not been necessary for a person
to be a citizen of the United States in order to be a citizen of his state.

United States v.
Cruikshank, 92 US 542, 549 (1875); quoted in Crosse v. Board of
Supervisors, 221 A2d 433 (1966).

You don't have to be a U.S. citizen in order to be
a state Citizen. So why are you? Social Security, marriage license, driver's
license are various entrapments. How many people here have marriage licenses?
When you got your marriage license, you married the state. The state is the
third party in your marriage contract.

The first marriage license ever issued in America
was in1839, to a rich South Carolina plantation owner, so he could marry his
mulatto slave. It was for an interracial  marriage:

MARRIAGE LICENSE. A license or permission granted
by public authority to persons who intend to intermarry,..

INTERMARRIAGE. In the popular sense, this term
denotes the contracting of a marriage relation between two persons considered as
members of different nations, tribes, families, etc...

I, as a state Citizen, got my due process the day I
was  born. Now I want you to tell me when you got your due process, as a
U.S. citizen:

As far as federal due process is
concerned, the right to trial by jury in state trials only dates from May 20,
1968, the date of the decisions of Duncan v. Louisiana, Bloom v.
Illinois, and Dyke
v. Taylor Implement Co. J. F., In re, 268 CA2d 761 (1969).

As a U.S. citizen, you did not have due process
prior to May 20, 1968. The courts decided you should have a little bit, so they
gave it to you. The courts could decide tomorrow to take it away, and they could
abolish it tomorrow. No bill of rights apply to you, except what the courts have
decided. You have no natural rights. The only natural rights you have are to be
a slave to the government.

All the states are sovereign countries. Each one
has their own Citizens.

Generally, the states of the Union
sustain toward each other the relationship of  independent sovereigns or
independent foreign states,..
81 CJS
8.

Each state is foreign to one another, except for
the powers that we gave to the federal government; to create interstate commerce
laws, bankruptcy laws, counterfeiting laws; but the federal government was given
no power to enforce them. They could not come into any state to enforce any
federal law, they could only go into a federal area and enforce it.

Next is from Ruling Case Law:

A state may impose an excise upon the
franchise of corporations engaging in a business which every citizen has a
right to engage in freely. ... A right common to every citizen such as the
right to own property or to engage in business of a character not requiring
regulation cannot, however, be taxed as a special franchise by first
prohibiting its exercise and then permitting its enjoyment upon the payment of
a certain sum of money.
26 RCL
131-132.

I'm the private Citizen. You're the franchisee.
Can a corporation have citizens? No. They have franchises. Can the United States
government have citizens? No, they can only have franchises. Have you heard of
the Franchise Tax Board? They're taxing your franchise here, as a U.S. citizen!

They're legitimate! They tell you right up-front
what you are! You're just too busy watching the boob-tube.

How many people here are registered to vote? Did
you know that when you register to vote, you put an automatic lien on all your
property?

Chapter 5 BOND ISSUES Sec. 5300.
Application by chapter

Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the provisions of this chapter
apply to all bond issues proposed by a county, city and county, city, district
or other political subdivision or by any agency, department, or board thereof,
the security for which constitutes a lien on the property within the
jurisdiction and the proposal for which is required to be submitted to the
voters for approval.

This law is written so broad, say the local school
district goes belly up, they can march into your house, strip you buck-naked,
and take everything you own.

That's why code-enforcement can come into your
house, because they have a vested interest. You gave it to them when you
registered to vote.

We're electors. Up 'till 1940 all the Citizens
signed the Great Register. We're trying to get the Great Register reestablished.
It was last sent to Sacramento in 1940, when they sent back federal voter
registration instead. You register as a federal citizen, not as a state citizen.

They've done everything very legitimate, very
honestly, very openly. You just didn't pay attention.

Everybody's seen the yellow fringe on the American
flag, flying in schoolhouses, office buildings, courtrooms, I want you to read
what that yellow fringe stands for:

Placing of fringe on national flag,..
are matters of detail not controlled by statute, but are within discretion of
President as Commander-In-Chief of Army and Navy. 34
OpAttyGen 483 (1925).

That's a military flag! A territorial flag. When
Arizona was a territory, before it became a state, that's what they had. They
made a lot of movies of the yellow-fringed flag. They tell you up front, you're
in a federal territory.

The proper place for that yellow-fringed flag would
be in the post office, military bases, Washington, D.C., or someplace like that.
If you're not in one of those federal areas, you shouldn't be flying that flag.
It only applies in a military post.

The government keeps two bookkeeping entries,
there's always two of everything. There's two constitutions in the state of
California. One for us Citizens, and one for you slaves. You have here the
California Constitution of 1879. I want you to read section two, and tell me
where the boundaries are:

SEC.
2. The boundaries of the state are those stated in the Constitution of
1849 as modified pursuant to statute. Sacramento is the capital of
California.

They refer you to the 1849 Constitution. The one
that created California. That one (1879) did not do anything. All the courts
recognize there are two constitutions. The1849 Constitution is a restriction and
limitation on the government. The 1879 Constitution is a restriction and
limitation on the slaves.

So, which do you want? The power to flow from the
People to the government, or the government granting you a little privilege?

All the courts recognize that there are two
constitutions. I want you to read the following. Everybody knows what a
substitute school teacher is.

Although the present constitution is not
the one under which the state was first formed, it is a substitute for that
adopted in 1849, as amended in 1862, and the present government is a
continuance of that established
11
Cal.Jur.2d 4.

It's merely a substitute, waiting for the Citizens
to come back. They're always consistent! They never lie.

Next is the Congressional Record of 1967:

The 14th Amendment Is Unconstitutional.

The purported 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution is and
should be held to be ineffective, invalid, null, void and unconstitutional for
the following reasons:

1. The Joint Resolution proposing said Amendment was not submitted to or
adopted by a Constitutional Congress. Article I. Section 3, and Article V of
the U.S. Constitution.

2. The Joint Resolution was not submitted to the President for his
approval. Article I. Section 7.

3. The proposed 14th Amendment was rejected by more than one-fourth of all
the States then in the Union, and it was never ratified by three-fourths of
all the States in the Union. Article V.

Congressional Record - House, June 13, 1967, p. 15641

In 1967 Congress tried to abolish the 14th
Amendment.What would happen if they abolished the 14th Amendment? They would
turn 250 million slaves free! Everybody would automatically revert back to state
Citizens. The federal government would lose all their taxing, Food & Drug
could not come in here, BATF could not come in here, IRS could not come in here,
DEA could not come in here, code enforcement could not come in here. All their
revenue raising measures would go down the tubes!

You've all heard judges say "I won't hear that
constitutional crap in my court! The constitution doesn't apply in this
courtroom!" Now read why he can say it:

An alien has no right to raise the
question whether a statute is violative of Const. U.S. art. 4. Sec 2.
declaring that the citizens of each state shall be entitled to all the
privileges and immunities of citizens of the several states.
In re Johnson's Estate,
73 P 424 (1903).

A citizen can challenge the constitutionality of
a statute; an alien cannot. A U.S. citizen is an alien to California.

Next court case you are getting is Hendrick v. Maryland, 59
LEd 385. Mr. Hendrick was a resident of the District of Columbia. In 1914, Mr.
Hendrick got in his motor vehicle and went into Maryland. Then he did something
wrong, and the police stopped and cited him.

Maryland had laws that all commercial vehicles had
to have registration, plates, and the drivers had to have a license. Citizens
did not. He was a resident of the District of Columbia, a U.S. citizen, and the
police officer knew the distinction, so he cited him. Hendrick was convicted,
and he appealed all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.

In 1914 the Supreme Court stated that a U.S.
citizen, when they leave the District of Columbia, are under the interstate
commerce clause. As such, they can be regulated, controlled, and taxed.

You, as a U.S. citizen, are here in California
under the interstate commerce clause. You can be regulated and controlled, you
have no rights whatsoever except what they want to give you -- civil rights.

That was in 1914. In that same year, read what the
California supreme court says:

The occupation of a chauffeur is one
calling for regulation, and therefore permitting a regulatory license fee,
under the rule that when a calling or profession or business is attended with
danger or requires a certain degree of scientific knowledge upon which others
must rely, then legislation properly steps in and imposes conditions upon its
exercise.
In re
Stork, 167 Cal 294 (1914).

They quote this as their authority to require
U.S. citizens to have driver's licenses. They don't quote the rest of it,
because it pertains to state Citizens:

The Motor Vehicle Act ... is not
unconstitutional as making an arbitrary and unwarranted classification, in
that it requires professional chauffeurs, or drivers of motor vehicles for
hire, to pay an annual license tax, but exempts all other operators of such
vehicles from such tax and regulation.
In re Stork, 167 Cal 294 (1914).

Question: As a California Citizen, am I giving up
my rights if I were to get a driver's license?

You'd have to commit perjury to get a driver's
license.

I'd have to state that I'm a resident, right?

Right.

And citizens can't have driver's licenses, right?

Right. They won't even give you one. I'm trying to
get one, but they won't issue it! Citizens are exempt. They can't have one.

How many people here have a motor vehicle outside?
You've just convicted yourselves, read the definition of "motor vehicle":

"Motor vehicle" means every description of carriage
or other contrivance propelled or drawn by mechanical power and used for
commercial purposes on the highways in the transportation of passengers, or
passengers and property.
USC  [United
States Code] Title 18, Sec. 31.

You just told me you had a taxicab outside!

When you stand in front of the judge, and he asks
if you have a vehicle outside, and you say "yes, your honor, I do" he takes
judicial notice you admitted you're involved in commercial activity.

How many people here have gotten a traffic ticket?
Ever look up the term "traffic" in the dictionary? Interstate  commerce!
That's why on the ticket, it says "traffic", "non-traffic", and "misdemeanor".

Right after the 14th amendment was allegedly
ratified California passed four codes. The Political Code, the Civil Code, the
Civil Code of Procedure, and the Penal Code. Here is the Penal Code of 1871. I
want you to read the definition of "person" and tell me where the Citizen is
mentioned:

19. Where the term "person" is used in
this code to designate the party whose property may be the subject of any
offense, it includes this state, any other state, government or country which
may lawfully own any property within this state, and all public and private
corporations or joint associations as well as individuals.

20. The word "person" includes bodies politic and
corporate.

Where does it say "Citizen"? Tell me where I'm
described in there.

There's always a motive for everything the
government does. What they wanted to do here was take your  allodial right
to property away (Black's Revised 4th):

ALLODIAL. Free; not holden of any lord
or superior; owned without obligation of vassalage or fealty; the opposite of
feudal...

ALLODIUM. Land held absolutely in one's
own right, and not of any lord or superior; land not subject to feudal duties
or burdens. An estate held by absolute ownership, without recognizing any
superior to whom any duty is due on account thereof...

(Ballentine's 1948):

allodial ... Free; not held
subordinately; opposed to "feudal." In England, all lands are held by the
crown, and none are allodial. In the United States, all lands have been
allodial since the American Revolution.

allodium ... An allodial estate; an estate not held under a
superior. See fee.

A U.S. citizen does not have the right to hold
property in allodium. You're a second-class citizen. If you have your property
in allodium, you don't pay land taxes.

All the land in California was given to the people
in allodium. There are several court cases which say that the land of the
thirteen original colonies was given to the people in allodium. They have the
absolute sovereign right to own property. Remember it says "people", it does not
say "persons" when it refers to allodium.  "Persons" are not "people"!

Next, you have California's admission into the
Union. Read the second paragraph:

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of
Representatives of the United States of  America in Congress assembled,
That the State of California shall be one, and is hereby declared to be one, of
the United States of America, and admitted into the Union on an equal footing
with the original States in all respects whatever.

California was admitted into the Union on an equal
footing with the original colonies in all respects whatsoever. All the land in
California is given to the people in allodium.

This building is not land. This building is
property. Land is land. Property is anything that can be moved. You, as a U.S.
citizen, are property. Land is held by a sovereign. All the land in England
belongs to the King of England. I am on the same status as the King of England.
If I were to buy land, I would have it in allodium. I have the same type of
authority.

Next is a court case from 1982:

Slater's protestations to the effect
that he derives no benefit from the United States government have no bearing
on his legal obligation to pay income taxes. ... Unless the defendant can
establish that he is not a citizen of the United States, the IRS possesses
authority to attempt to determine his federal tax liability.
U.S. v. Slater, 545 FSupp
179, 182 (1982).

They never lie! They are always consistent in
what they say!

Next is Revenue Ruling 57-576. This is our prime
authority for asking our Social Security money back:

Social Security coverage extended to
individuals employed by a foreign subsidiary of a domestic corporation
pursuant to an agreement under section 3121(l) of the Federal Insurance
Contributions Act is limited to United States citizens. Accordingly, such
coverage ceases on the date that such an employee becomes a citizen of another
country. Amounts paid under the agreement with respect to coverage of such
individual prior to the date on which he became a  citizen of another
country are not refundable.

Question: You mean we can ask for this money back?

Yes, but there's a problem. We allege fraud when we
ask for our Social Security money back, because we were never a United States
citizen. There's the problem, because if you allege fraud, they have to give you
compound interest. But the government has written many, many letters stating if
you do not have a Social Security number, you would not be subject to the income
tax. So, if I was illegally and wrongfully entrapped into getting a Social
Security number, I would get all my money from day one, plus compound interest.
What they owe me would equal the federal debt!

Next is a deposition hearing by Virgil Cooper in
Arizona. I want you to read the questions. Every question is a trick question,
and every answer is the legally correct answer:

Q: Are you a citizen of the United States?

A: No, I am not.

Q: Are you a resident of Arizona?

A: No, I am not. I was born in Phoenix. I have
lived in Maricopa County all my life, but I am not a resident. I do not reside.

Q: Are you registered to vote?

A: No, I am not.

Q: Do you have a driver's license?

A: No, I do not.

Q: Do you have any motor vehicles registered in
Arizona?

A: No, I do not.

Q: Are you employed?

A: No. I am not. I am not employed. I am not
unemployed. I am not self-employed. I am not gainfully employed. In fact, I am
not employable. But, I work. Besides, Arizona is a  right to work state.

Q: Do you pay state and federal resident income
taxes?

A: No, I do not.

Q: Do you pay property taxes in Arizona?

A: No, I do not.

Q: Do you have a marriage license?

A: No, I do not.

Q: Do you have children enrolled in public school?

A: No, I do not. My children are home taught.

You've really done your homework!

You know what the definition of the word "employee"
is? It was re-defined in the 1939 Public Salary Tax Act to mean "government
worker". When you said you're employed, you told me that you work for the
government.

When you sign a W-4, what does it say at the top?
"Employee's Withholding Certificate". You just admitted under penalties of
perjury that you work for the government. Remember, I told you that they always
have two of everything? They have W-8 forms for state Citizens, and W-4 for
slaves.

Next is what you have to say to a police officer
when you get stopped with no driver's license, and no registration:

Officer: I pulled you over because your vehicle has
no license plates.

Citizen: Yes, officer, I do not have plates on my
car. I removed them and sent them back to the DMV because they belonged to a
resident involved in commercial activity. I asked them to send me proper plates
for a Citizen. They have not done so yet. I have the paperwork in the car if you
would like to see it.

Officer: May I see your driver's license?

Citizen: I do not have a driver's license as I do
not drive commercially. I cancelled it with the DMV and asked them to send me
proper ID for a Citizen to travel. They have not sent me anything yet. I have
the paperwork in the car if you would like to see it.

Officer: Do you have any ID?

Citizen: Here is how I identify myself (present
Personal ID).

Remember to be sober, polite, agreeable, and
businesslike while keeping good eye contact and an assured tone of voice.

NEVER challenge an officer's authority on the
street --wait for court.

WORDS TO
USE:

Car, machinery, conveyance.
Guests, friends,
family.
Traveling, journeying.
Abode, living, housekeeping.

WORDS NOT TO
USE:

Motor vehicle.
Passengers.
Driving.

Resident.

To learn more about state Citizenship, contact:

Sir Richard James, McDonald
2nd Judicial District
585 Box Canyon Rd.
Canoga Park,
California

Join our Citizenship Educational
program

(818) 703-5037 voice
http://www.state-citizen.org/

Go To:  A list of files
that Richard McDonald offers to
Download For FREE to aid in one's
understanding of their rights.