My argument is that it id impossible for a warrant to ever be legitimate and they can't prove it because it requires proof, evidence that satisfies the element of jurisdiction of the defending party. After all it is innocent until proven guilty ethics in play is it not? So, what evidence do they have that I am guilty of jurisdiction?In a victimless case, for example what do you suppose makes a warrant legitimate? Well I already answered that above. Evidence that supports the legitimacy to rule over me. But what do you suppose that is?