It seems to me that if I ever end up in a court room, it will take some time to make them understand why and how I am in Lawful Rebellion, so I may use Dean's approach.
Now, the only immediate difference between UK and Canada is the 'live birth record'. If we have an equivalent, it is the original entry which is kept at the Registrars office. I know that I only have a copy of my birth certificate and that the original has never been in my possession.
Real world example, and in my case, we can use the UKBA thing, the speeding thing, or the HMRC thing.
On entering the court we demand common law jurisdiction. From an earlier post we know that all courts in the UK are illegal so we can use this to our advantage. As Dean says, there is no harm in admitting that you are the name on their docket. The clever bit is moving yourself from their side to your side. Once you are using the left hand column, you are untouchable. One proviso: if you have killed, hurt, robbed or raped someone, you are on your own. I would only use this to protect myself against what I see as victimless crimes. Speeding fines, parking fines, council tax, income tax or corporation tax. In short, when you have bent a statute.
Once the formalities are over, say to the judge/JP/magistrate/sheriff "I accept that you are on your oath today". What is he or she going to say to that? "Actually, no. I am not"? Won't happen. It tells them that you understand the importance of the oath, and that you understand how the game is played. Another vital phrase Dean mentions is "I am appearing in propria persona as the authorised representative of the name with all of my inherent rights intact". Bang! You are in the left hand column and they cannot use statutes against you.
Very, very simple.
Even if you do not want to enter Lawful Rebellion or follow Freeman principles, there is a Declaration that will help out. It is the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. In our case we would use paragraph three:
"Whereas it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law,"
In conjunction with Article 4 and Article 20. See them here.
Article 20 is particularly useful as a method of withdrawing your consent to be governed:
"(2) No one may be compelled to belong to an association."
It seems to me to be logical that if consent can be given, it can also be taken away. Besides which, the government we have today is one that no-one voted for. So how can anyone compel you to follow their demands?
I firmly believe this method can be used to rid yourself of many forms of taxation. Remember this: they can tax the name but not the man. They can fine the name, but not the man. They can control the name, but not the man.
Dean is very clever. He has shown us how to win at a stroke. He has shown us how to be people again. Dean removes the need to use words carefully, as he says, use the words as you mean them, and don't worry about the definitions they attach to them. Keep It Simple Stupid.
The floor is yours.