Correct The Unlawful Legal System - they're just a bunch of CTULS

[hucknallred]

Stacey offering support for XL Bully owners

[longdog]

Great. So she's going to tell dog owners to ignore the law which will probably lead to the dogs being seized and destroyed.

Genius!

[TheRambler]

Great. So she's going to tell dog owners to ignore the law which will probably lead to the dogs being seized and destroyed.

Genius!

I have no objection to the owners being neutered, microchipped, muzzled and kept on a lead in public but I feel the potential outcome for the dogs is grossly unfair.

TheRambler

[ArthurWankspittle]

how to stand in your power

Has she been swapping meters too?

[John Uskglass]

King John reassures his faithful hounds that Magna Carta applies to them.

[hucknallred]

Here we have it



https://www.facebook.com/groups/1037543240797590/

[hucknallred]

And she's off...

Stacey Grace Evans
Admin

Right people listen up....
Nobody has ever consented to be governed; some unknown individual from the so-called government has written down some ideas and is calling it a "Legislation",, no one has agreed to it.
Legal is BY AGREEMENT.
The £92 exemption fee is a SCAM, everyone is already 'exempt' from the written policy by default. (You can't be exempt from something that doesn't apply).
The 'government' can't ban anything,, HM Parliaments and Governments PLC, a PRIVATE LIMITED COMPANY has no more authority than McDonalds. So they are tricking people into compliance.
Owners of XL Bully TYPE dogs must (may) register their dog as exempt (as a banned breed the XL Bully TYPE) once registered you agree to comply with those conditions (restrictions) and should you not follow those rules that were agreed to in the exemption process the dog can be seized.
If an XL Bully is not registered as exempt then there is no agreement. If the dog is seized then it is THEFT. The police have to comply with the Habeas Corpus Act and release the dog within 24- 48 hours of receiving a Writ of Habeas Corpus unless there is tangible evidence that the dog has committed a crime. Not wearing a muzzle isn't a crime if nobody has been injured,, you never agreed to muzzle your dog, someone wrote it down on paper just like the covid BS.
My dog Bronson is an XL Bully he's 24 ½ inches at the withers, but according to the AKC he is too tall to be an XL Bully and couldn't compete in any XL Bully shows because of this; he fits the rest of the nonsense government website, like the majority of similar large breeds .
I muzzle him by choice because he is reactive towards small intact males i.e., Jack Russells and would react if a Jack Russell went for him because of a past experience . He's great off the lead and likes to play with other similar sized neutered males and any sized female.
It is an absurd request to keep the dog on the lead when the dog is muzzled; do they think the muzzle won't work?, yet apparently a piece of cloth was sufficient to protect people from the "deadliest virus" in history.
If anyone stops you when you're out walking then they MUST have reasonable grounds that you have comitted a CRIME, ie., they saw you committing a CRIME or have physical presentable material evidence that you committed a crime causing another individual harm, loss, or injury, in which case they would NOT NEED TO SPEAK TO YOU; the only reason the police need to speak to you is to get you to give evidence against YOURSELF!
So just just say: "I don't answer questions" and keep walking! They can't police it anyway, it will ONLY be if someone reports you for your dog attacking someone/another dog or causing a nuisance.
Always have a small body cam on when out walking your dogs.
Also, if on the off chance someone was to stop you they are making a claim that you have an "XL Bully TYPE DOG", so it's on them to prove it.
"He who makes a claim bears the burden of proof and carries the OBLIGATION to provide the material evidence to support that claim".
Ask for the claim to be put in writing, you don't have to prove anything because you're not the one making the claim, THEY ARE.
The very act of stopping you is a CLAIM of authority, challenge it.
So basically you either own an XL Bully or you don't, there is no such thing as an XL Bully TYPE dog; that is merely the opinion of some people sat in Westminster that the majority of us have never met and never will.
All a load of nonsense to raise money for the government's get rich quick scheme.
Just continue as normal and loose the FEAR.

[longdog]

Habeas Corpus applies to dogs now does it? Whodathunkit?

[Burnaby49]

It's in the Magna Carta. Get Jacquie Phoenix on the job!

[John Uskglass]

Habeas Canis surely?

[SpearGrass]

Habeas canem ad subjiciendum strictly speaking (i.e. legally and Latinly)

There is no Habeas Corpus Act, it's (for once) common law. To succeed you have to submit an applciation and pay the fee; the High Court will order release if they find that the detention is unlawful. Readers of this forum will not be surprised to know that it doesn't apply to goods (which is what a dog is).

There is a not much sense in what she's saying. Having a banned dog is a criminal offence and a police oficer can arrest for it if one of the conditions in s. 24 of PACE applies, e.g. that they can't ascertain the suspect's address without detaining them, which her advice renders virtually inevitable. They can then seize the dog, just as they can use anything else which appears to be used in the commission of a crime.

[jcolvin2]

Habeas canem

Also known as the Great (Dane) Writ.

[Albert Haddock]

There is no Habeas Corpus Act, it's (for once) common law.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/aep/Cha2/31/2

It was enacted because, as a common law right, it was capable of being eroded by judges.

[SpearGrass]

Dang, how annoying, you are quite right, there is a Habeas Corpus Act. However, in my defence, you don't apply under the Act, and it didn't create the writ of Habeas Corpus. It regulates the pre-existing common law power.

[Hercule Parrot]

And she's off...

All the bad advice a worried XL Bully owner could need. Don't comply, don't register, don't bother with muzzles or leads, just spout bollocks about Habeas Corpus. Let's see how it works out in practice, how many of them will push it until their dog is seized & euthanised.

[JamesVincent]

This'll end well ...

One of the things that always gets me is that whenever a whackjob makes an absolutely asinine statement you'll always find a bunch of people "liking" their comment. That means that there's not only Whackjob #1 but a bunch of mini whackjobs right behind them supporting them. I see it a lot with online discussions about things like the 16th Amendment and other conspiracy theories. The comment will go: "There is no evidence that the dark side of the moon is actually dark, they just put up really big curtains" and 30 people will like it.