|
I do not dispute any of your observations. The law of God reigns supreme. However, what I am questioning is the definitions of the statutory code. I want to know what the "STATE" considers "property" to be. If we do not transport property as they define it, then we can assert our rights to, "drive", "travel", "ingress and regress" or what ever is the proper non-statutory term. I am trying to find the best way to completely disarm the "STATE" by using their own definitions. Unfortunately, the mere assertion that we follow God's supreme law does not translate into victories when we are in the modern court. Let us try to beat them using their own codes against them. The remedy is available, even though they try to hide it under layers of ambiguity.
|