Quote:
|
Originally Posted by weishaupt1776
The word "natural person" does indeed indicate a living, breathing, flesh and blood being.
However, it also denotes a "proprietary capacity" tht that being is operating in
If you have not cancelled/rebutted/formally challenged the preumption that you are a "U.S. Citizen" pursuant to the 14th Amendment, then you will always be presumed to be a "person" or "natural person" who is operating within their 14th amendment private law system.
The Law of Persons stems from Roman Civil law
this is discussed in great detail in the Red Amendment
|
So as long as we can demonstrate that we are
people and not "statutory" persons, and if we disconnect our private cars from the certificate of title and registrations of any kind, then we can succeed in our endeavor to be let alone.
Articles of Confederation
Article IV. The better to secure and perpetuate mutual friendship and intercourse among the people of the different States in this Union, the free inhabitants of each of these States, paupers, vagabonds, and fugitives from justice excepted, shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of free citizens in the several States;
and the people of each State shall free ingress and regress to and from any other State, and shall enjoy therein all the privileges of trade and commerce, subject to the same duties, impositions, and restrictions as the inhabitants thereof respectively, provided that such restrictions shall not extend so far as to prevent the removal of property imported into any State, to any other State, of which the owner is an inhabitant; provided also that no imposition, duties or restriction shall be laid by any State, on the property of the United States, or either of them.
The Right To Travel
As the Supreme Court notes in Saenz v Roe, 98-97 (1999), the Constitution does not contain the word "travel" in any context, let alone an explicit right to travel (except for members of Congress, who are guaranteed the right to travel to and from Congress). The presumed right to travel, however, is firmly established in U.S. law and precedent. In U.S. v Guest, 383 U.S. 745 (1966), the Court noted, "It is a right that has been firmly established and repeatedly recognized." In fact, in Shapiro v Thompson, 394 U.S. 618 (1969), Justice Stewart noted in a concurring opinion that "it is a right broadly assertable against private interference as well as governmental action. Like the right of association, ... it is a virtually unconditional personal right, guaranteed by the Constitution to us all." It is interesting to note that the Articles of Confederation had an explicit right to travel; it is now thought that the right is so fundamental that the Framers may have thought it unnecessary to include it in the Constitution or the Bill of Rights.
from www.usconstitution.net
"The claim and exercise of a constitutional right cannot be converted into a crime." Miller v. U.S. 230 F 486, 489.