Only slaves ask for permission to exercise rights.

Actually, the title to this post is wrongheaded. Slaves don't have rights. They only are granted privileges by their masters. They MUST beg for permission to exercise those privileges.

Think about that the next time your about to beg them for permission to do something.
Ask yourself:

1. Is what I want to do lawful to do?
a) If yes, then why do you need to be licensed to do it?
b) If No, then how would asking government somehow make it a lawful activity?

2. Is it my right to do this?

3. Do I have the right to do this?

4. Does it harm another or their rights if I do this?

5. Is there ANY fraud involved? (Gov can not license fraudulent activities, even though they do it all the time)

6. Does my asking for permission to do lawful acts grant them my consent to step in and tell me what to do?

7. Do they then have MY permission to tell me just how I can exercise a right because I consented by asking for their permission?

8. Who died and made them god?

9. Are they MY public servants or MY masters?
a) If public servants, then why are you asking them for permission to exercise your rights?
b) If "masters" then learn why granting them your consent makes that so! And learn what granting them your consent even means!
c) Do I even have rights after I granted them to someone else?

Some stuff to think about before you go begging some pointy headed bureaucrat public servant for permission to exercise your rights such as a constitutionally protected right to bear arms. 

I disagree with some of the information presented in this video, but for the most part, I do agree with the content.
 

Robin Hood Philosophy

I understand the concept of fighting fraud with fraud. I'll call it the Robin Hood philosophy. While I won't claim it's all bad, I would add that it is the same as fighting fire with fire, or an eye for an eye.  
"An eye for an eye only ends up making the whole world blind." - Mahatma Gandhi 

My own recent quote on the subject 

"You can fight Bullshit with Bullshit, but in the end you both wind up covered in shit" ~Chris Duke

How far you wish to go in using the Robin Hood Philosophy depends entirely on how much shit your willing to deal with, or more eloquently put, how much you are willing to become that which you despise. As I get older, I see much of what I have hated in the past in myself. 

"hate begets hate" and "violence begets violence" Does "fraud beget fraud?"

Despite my understanding of the concept, I still can't help but feel it justifiable on some level. Where it gets stuck in the mud for me is when you are presented with a violent act, and are in need to defend yourself and or your possessions or others from attack. I don't believe that scenario fits into the whole Robin Hood philosophy. I believe that to be another concept entirely, but have not been able to conceptualize a soft dividing line between the two. The hard dividing line is easy to see. A man comes after you with a knife, you pull out a gun and kill the fool. I don't consider that fighting fire with fire even if you were to use a knife to fight off a knife wielding attacker. But what got me to write this post in the first place was in reply to a comment about how to deal with the courts and cops who are using fraud to steal from the people. That is the soft dividing line in my opinion, that's difficult to justify with the Robin Hood philosophy. Do you risk becoming like them in using fraud to fight back? Or do you take the high ground? Any REAL LAW ALWAYS provides remedy. What these fraudsters are doing provides NO remedy whatsoever. That's one way you can tell they are not real laws. 

So to answer my own question, I would suggest vacating the fiction, removing ones self from their privileges, stop consenting to be a party to their fraud, and then, once that has been accomplished, ones hands would be clean in whatever one does to recover or defend from their unlawful activities. But there is the catch 9 again. Should you consider (once ones hands are clean) conducting ones self in fraud to get compensation or battle the fraud once ones hands are clean? They would inevitably wind up covered in shit if you do.

Legalization

I've been making the very same point Dean is in this video. Legalization of anything is bad. If it's not unlawful to do, then why legalize it? Why would you want to beg someone for permission to do something that is not unlawful to do in the first place? As soon as something is made 'legal' then it is subject to regulation, fines, taxes, and penalties. Legalization is a scam to steal money from people who have committed no crime, breach of the peace, fraud, or harmed, or stolen from anyone, and that is all it ever will be.