View Single Post
  #31  
Old 04-05-2008, 11:05 AM
Lawdog Lawdog is offline
Mental Jujitsu
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 710
lacking merit

Quote:
Originally Posted by rodman652
Also, your claim "that the unlicensed operation of a motor vehicle on the public highways has NEVER been held to be one of the rights, privileges or immunities secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States.", lacks merit.

Perhaps you should brush up on the 9th & 10th amendments to the constitution.

Shoonra is correct. It is YOUR position which lacks merit.

Perhaps you should brush up on something. Namely, Hendrick v. Maryland, 235 U.S. 610 (1915), wherein the Supreme Court ruled that under their general police power, states may indeed require that all drivers be licensed and that all automobiles be registered. This case is sometimes cited by the court when a "sovereign" nutball argues he has an inherent right to drive on public roads with no license, tag, insurance, etc.

Any argument that "I have the right to drive on public streets without obeying the laws regarding driver licensing, registration and insurance because [insert your pet theory here]", is a guaranteed loser.
__________________
We reject Skurdal's argument that he is a "free man" exempt from the laws because he has "no contracts" with either the state or federal governments...No persons in Montana may exempt themselves from any law simply by declaring they do not consent to it applying to them...Accepting Skurdal's assertion of exempt status is an invitation to anarchy. We decline that invitation. - State v. Skurdal, Supreme Court of Montana, 235 Mont. 291, 767 P.2d 304 at 308 (1988).
Reply With Quote