Law of police pulling you over?

Got bored after a few minutes. What a tedious buffoon, sounds like the sort of bloke I'd like to poke in the eye
 
Can't see the vid, is he doing that Freeman on the land rubbish?

Possibly. Thats not a term I'm familiar with I will read into it a little. He is exercising his right to traval.

Some of what goes on makes sense from work Ive done. Like the fact any car you buy doesn't actually belong to you, from a legal sense your just driving it. And I can see where he's is going with the insurance part.

I never really looked into the definition of a driver before my mind is blown:p
 
Last edited:
I agree with him in principle and can understand what he's doing to some extent. But driving without the backing of insurance is a massive liability unless your stinking rich.

Search google for "Stop stopping me gun boys" if you want to see an idiot that needs doing. Its an 18+ only video.
 
The theoretical maximum penalties are identical I think


The usual punishment for failing to provide assumes that they are just over the limit. So yes, if you know that you are well over the limit then refusing a test will get you a lower punishment than what you would get if you were (say) three times the limit. I think it was dirtydog here who went down this route when he knew he was massively over the limit.
 
Can't see the vid, is he doing that Freeman on the land rubbish?

Pretty much. He sounds like a complete nutcase.

The officer who dealt with him for most of it deserves an award, he clearly knew his stuff (as you'd expect) and was extraordinarily patient with the guy.
 
No point in looking for a reason. They will just make one up if they want to tug you. I have not been tugged in 13 years but know people who are at least every month. They are like me nearly 40 years old. Difference I guess is, I drive a diesel crossover and they have BMW's with spoilers and body kits.

I am sure car type comes into it, I owned 9 Alfa Romeos over 12 years and never got tugged once. That was despite living in London, Surrey, Kent and Sussex so it can't be an area thing.
 
i was stopped once due to routine checking. Took 5 minutes and the police were very polite about it. Was given the all clear and wished a safe journey home :) I don't see the problem really.

Agree, .. but It could be an inconvenience if your running late for work etc .. then I would have to make up the 5 minutes by speeding the rest of the journey :D
 
OP try this next time


I don't understand what this guy is doing but its very interesting. Can anyone explain whats happening?

There's really nothing big or clever about this. The guy is being a knob.

From experience the police are perfectly reasonable unless you're the one who is being aggressive/drunk etc.
 
OP try this next time

I don't understand what this guy is doing but its very interesting. Can anyone explain whats happening?
What a complete waste of space. Glad to see he lost his car.

He's just a leach on society. If he wants to 'travel', get off of the roads that my tax has paid for, and wasting the time of police.
 
Watched some more of his videos.

Aparently road tax was abolished in 1930 odd and they brought in VED.
Acording to him the roads are maintained with the tax on petrol.

Im lost :S
 
The freeman thing stems from a fundamental misunderstanding.

They think that a birth certificate is actually a berth certificate so when you are born you are registered as a boat… yes it actually is that crazy

They mention maritime law quite a bit because of this, if you realise (like most sane people) that a birth certificate is actually a birth certificate then most of the freeman logic crumbles away
 
been driving for almost 20 years and I've only been stopped and breathalysed only once. it was in the evening of the day I passed my driving test -
In the space of one day I took a 2-hour lesson, then the test, then I bought my first car, drove about 100 miles, fueled up for the first ever (under 50p a litre back then), drove more, went to my brother in Islington - and on the way home got pulled over

I had explain to the police why I didn't have an actual license photocard yet, the car was still registered to someone else, and why I was driving around King's Cross at 2am - aged 17 yrs old...

edit: and why I chose a gold MKII escort as my first car lol
 
Last edited:
Possibly. Thats not a term I'm familiar with I will read into it a little. He is exercising his right to traval.

NOM8

Some of what goes on makes sense from work Ive done. Like the fact any car you buy doesn't actually belong to you, from a legal sense your just driving it. And I can see where he's is going with the insurance part.

NOM8

It's freeman of the land rubbish

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Freeman_on_the_land

A form of pseudolegal woo in various English-speaking countries. Freemen believe they can opt out of being governed, and that what normal people understand to be "laws" are merely a form of "contract" that applies only if people consent to it. In practical terms, they believe this means they do not have to pay taxes, debts, mortgages, etc. because we were all deceived and if you say the right form of words this fact will be accepted.

No freeman arguments have ever succeeded in court; some have even explicitly ruled that the term "freeman on the land" has no legal significance when the argument is raised.[5] Actually using the arguments gets people into worse trouble, including fines, asset seizures, contempt convictions and criminal records. However, this doesn't stop freemen from claiming that it works.
 
Back
Top Bottom