In Australia, a law of Theft by Finding (TBF) exists. It is used to suppress crime.
TBF is a hard rubbish law.
Key words: cartel, corruption, high crime, extortion, racketeering, property crime, secret, deception, exploitation, fraud, legal fiction, predatory practices, market distortion, market domination, price fixing, collusion, property confiscation, pickers, ACCC, COAG, BigInc. IP= COAG, contractors, BigInc (corporations like Colgate), Police.
Synopsis
In Victoria, Australia (I don’t know about other states), there is a regular community event called the Hard Rubbish collection, or Kerbside Waste collection, and various other names for an event where households in the community are given the opportunity to put unwanted goods out on the council owned nature strip for collection by others. People colloquially know as ‘Pickers’ sometimes sift through this event and its by-product, discarded goods and objects.
A person can be caught by Police and charged with TBF whilst collecting objects during this event. The Police are used to protect a legally questionable racket.
Supposition A
The Interested Parties (IP) involved are usually the contractor, the local council and the Police. They collude together with various forms of contract, such as social, formal, and spoken. They together form a predatory scheme. Upon finding goods given by households upon council land, they enter into no contract with The Public (TP), they offer nor give no legal receipt for goods and objects, obtain no legal permission from TP, compensate no individual legal owner of any of the goods nor give any form of fiat debt instrument or financial compensation for any goods found during the event period.
The IP operate only under the assumption of implied social contract and implied ownership by acquiescence. An ownership which is not legally gained. Only assuaged, implied and extorted.
In short, the IP claim ownership of any goods found. The possession and ownership is implied
Taken to its full legal implications in the future the IP intends to posses leftover or redundant goods and objects before they leave household’s front gates.
The implied social contract between the IP and TP is gained only by public acquiescence alone. And no proof of ownership is applied legally by the IP. There is no proof from any individual owner of any good or object by the IP, there is no proof of implied social contract used by the IP, nor proven by legal tender and no proof of public acquiescence exists.
The IP has not legally established with every legal owner of all the goods, objects and property that the implied or given acquiescence has been relinquished by property owners; as would be the case when TP seeks to first obtain them.
Worse, governments imply that this is a good way of dealing with leftover capital goods which may be suited for repair and re-use, a great form of social recycling, a great way to conserve resources. Many objects would be repairable, re-usable and can contribute to sustainability in cases of re-purposing. Even objects designated as single-use.
The public is bullied and bluffed by the IP using legal fiction.
The goods of recyclable and re-usable quality may surreptitiously find their way into shipping containers sent to foreign lands for profit. Or grabbed under intense circumstance to be sent by imperative to immediate destruction and burial. No matter the obvious viability of the goods and objects.
Supposition B
Taken to its full legal extent Property Confiscation upon implied redundancy will ensue in the future.
The IP has not legally established or proved that original ownership is null, instead the implied social contract between the IP and TP is implied to be given in any and all instances of object possession, such as applies to all goods and objects found in the event.
Nearly all objects and goods found are all legally owned community property. The IP has no lawful claim on them at any point of their existence. Not from point of manufacture, nor to point of last dumping. IP has at no point entered into a contract of any form or any legal tender between the good and the legally receipted owner of it. At no time, is the IP on any legal standing in claims of possession, ownership or implied interest.
It appears that in this case, no Government departments have a heart or stomach for applying the rule of law. Or even care.
The IP has not proven in any case of ownership and all cases of same, that TP or the legal owner of goods and objects would give or allow them to be taken by TP, or a Picker. As might be the case if an invitation or situation arose of gifting. The precedent is not set. Only implied. And enforced.
A situation of graft arises then where fines are extorted from TP, and shared amongst the IP.
Using First World capitalist philosophy and culturally enforsive co-ersive practices, and fraudulent and predatory practices, the IP is able to profit massively elsewhere from millions of tons of displaced property using the principles of racketeering to collect goods found on nature strips.
Taken to its full legal extent Property Confiscation upon implied redundancy will ensue in the future.
What of the true value of goods and objects that may have historical or social value? What of the potential for re-use? What of sustainable government and manufacturing practices? What of the law?
The IP deems the articles invaluable at the time of their dispensation consequently abrogating any legal property rights. Hence they likely pay no GST, CGT, no tax at all on any of the product. Hence, we have a case of implied capital rights abrogation.
In other terms, Rights Dispensation.
The Police and implied Common Law are used to protect the claims and activities of a Cartel operating outside of Federal Law on a massive patch.
Australia was recently expelled from the Plastic Recycling trade to China. Due to corruption.
…………………………………………………………….
http://www.thedailysheeple.com/civility ... ics_062018
http://www.shtfplan.com/emergency-prepa ... n_06272018
https://photos.app.goo.gl/SfymiwzULo2bNgKdA
