Google definitions of 'bogan' and 'sovereign citizen' -

bogan: "an uncouth unsophisticated person regarded as being of low social status".

sovereign citizen: "a member of a political movement of people who oppose taxation, question the legitimacy of government, and believe that they are not subject to the law."

The two only recently coined descriptions of people do not belong in the same conversation. It pays to know the meaning of words before charging into a post

To go shopping, using common currency, someone must use roads and footpaths. Possibly that someone must cross the road at the lights. If someone goes shopping at night, no doubt someone would feel grateful for the street-lighting, not to mention the even nature (hopefully) of the footpaths.

That person probably assumes that if their house is burgled while they are out shopping, then they have recourse to the police, like anybody else. If they are assaulted while catching the burglars in the act, they would probably assume that they can make use of the local hospital.

Their kids make use of the publicly-funded school system.

Such a person would assume they have the right to seek employment, to be paid standard wages, as protected by the country's laws, and to be reimbursed in some way if they comply with the conditions necessary to secure unemployment benefits.

And so on, and on. But then the world is full of dumb-arses.

But I do take exception to the slur against bogans, coming from a long and multicultural line of bogans, and long histories of boganism in their original countries.

Joe

Hi Foxy and Joe,

I'm more of the opinion some caught not wearing a mask, particularly in Melbourne, believed they would get away with it. When caught cold they used the "sovereign citizen" excuse because they had nothing else. Recently I watched an episode of 'Highway Petrol' where the cops pull up this Bogan speeding in a defective, unregistered vehicle, he's got no licence. When the cop asks "What's your excuse fella?" The guy tried the same thing "I'm a sovereign citizen, copper I'll have your job!" Well no, it was laughable, he was an idiot.

I think ttbn would make a great sovereign citizen, I can't wait to see him on 'Highway Patrol'.

Is there any merit in what the true believers in sovereign citizenry claim? Do we have any believers on the Forum, or is it just something a Bogan might throw up in desperation when caught out.

Funny how ttbn's 'found' definition of a 'Sovereign Citizen' would alternatively apply perfectly to a 'Libertarian'?

Can something weird be happening to the 'definitions' and 'interpretations' of terms in common use - in some clandestine conspiracy to make us question our beliefs, or even to send us 'tropo'?

(Tropo used to refer to a state of mental disturbance and instability supposedly sustained in reaction to inordinate immersion in an intense 'tropical' environment. Who knows what its 'new' meaning may be?)

So, in this vein, is it possible that some 'clever' and more than likely 'unhinged' individual, hiding in the shadows and delirious with laughter at their 'cleverness', has coined the new-wave term 'Qanon' as an ever-so-clever 'revision' of 'Quran'?
Such an individual would of course be secretly a super-bogan Islamophobic, homophobic, red-neck white supremacist junk-head having a huge laugh at the infantile gullibility of masses of 'conspiracy addicted' individuals resident in that swamp across the Pacific?
And, stranger than strange, numbers of such intensely unhappy clutching-at-straws suckered delusional 'fruitcakes' have gone so far as to select a 'dyed-in-the-wool' nutcase Qanon 'believer' to run for the Congress of the Greatest Show on Earth!
Staggering!

So, I reject the new-wave re-definition of a 'Sovereign Citizen', and I unreservedly define the originator of that new-wave pile of horse feathers as most definitely a 'dwarf-bogan'.

Such followers of this demonic 'corpse fly' Qanon 'instigator' I also unreservedly define as 'nongs'.
(Please, Supreme Being, make America sane again - before we all become totally and irreversibly 'Trumpified'.)

"Sovereign Citizen" is a contraction in terms.

Everyone should be able to enjoy their inherent and natural sovereignty over their life: this planet does not belong to any person or any group of people, so one should be able to walk its face and use its resources at their pleasure.

Nobody is to be automatically assumed to belong to a group and be subject to its laws only because they live on this earth and breath its air. Nobody has the moral right to count you in their group without your consent (explicit or implicit).

However, it is hypocritical to willingly benefit from group-membership while denying the obligations that come with it - such behaviour is not on and ought to be laughed at!

It is most unfortunate and wrong that, due to extreme human overpopulation, this whole planet is being controlled by one society, leaving no space for anyone else. Even while this society is divided into many "sovereign" countries, it is still the same society so long as these countries recognise each other as such.

How should we refer to someone who chooses not to belong to our society?

- I suggest we refer to them as AN ANIMAL (but not in any derogatory sense).

Animals share earth's space and resources, and while they may have rules and territorial boundaries within their species, there are no rules or boundaries overall, so no animal ever complains that animals of a different species fail to obey their laws!

While it is ridiculous to charge, convict or punish an animal for breaking human laws, humans, like all other species, may act in self-defense, so when a wild animal is believed to be infectious to humans, necessary steps can legitimately be taken to keep it away from human settlement.

Dear Paul,

If you're a resident in Australia you must abide by
Australian law. There's no way that a person can opt
out of Australian law by declaring themselves to be ...
whatever they want to be.
There's no legal basis for the claims of someone
"whatsoever" for their claims that they are above
the law.

I had assumed this "Sovereign Citizen" rubbish was
an American fad. It apparently has reached Australia
but is only a small minority.

In any case if these people refuse to wear masks - perhaps
people can simply refuse to allow them into their premises -
be it in stores, doctor's offices, hospitals, or anywhere
else that they wish to go?