Right to Travel

[ezrhythm]

Great point! And "The priviledge" they are refering to is "driving".

[ndusa]

Originally Posted by ezrhythm

Great point! And "The priviledge" they are refering to is "driving".

Look, I'm not trying to offend you or anyone else. I'm tired and been barking at people since I got up, not that an excuse makes it okay.

I hear what your saying, have tons of material on the subject. So with that, I'm gonna tip out the door on this one if that okay, and just do a little reading before I go to bed.

[ezrhythm]

ndusa wrote;
...and my opinion means nothing.
Your opinion means something to me and I'm sure it means something to others that come along. It may inspire thought even if your opinion is that, I should keep my opinion to myself.

...all your mumbo jumbo double talk...
I accept your opinion.

Why argue with me, go argue with the Supremes...
No desire to but if they want to join in on the discussion here that would be a BIG hoot.

Go to a jury, you will never find 12 people in montana who are going to let you go, I'm sorry, that just how it is in the real world.
I'm sure I could find 12 people, it's just that they wouldn't allow me the benefit of choosing.

[aksis]

I can understand why people would be having a hard time just ripping the plates off their car and doing a 100mph down the road.

I can see the wisdom in requiring that the cars be identifiable at a distance, yet... the state is providing this services, at a fee, in it's corporate capacity, and if the state has such a power, then I have it as well...

I don't see what would prevent someone from doing a private registration - a notarized document, filed in the public record, notice sent to a few select state offices, create notorized identification (ID# = number of the private registration filing), and then create a plate [flag], that uses the filing number... all via our own inherent administrative powers, abilities, and rights, Or, one could use the DMV's services... (they are mighty fine, to say the least, just sign on the line, and attach the leash.)

If we have the ability to do something, and while doing it, we don't wrong anyone, there we find a right.

Rights superceed statutes.

I have the ability to create a written work, and it could be created to described in detail: that the document is a notice of private registration, describe who I am and how to contact me, the details of a certian car, and notice of the private registration I will be maintaining on the property in my private records, signed and sealed with a finger print.

I believe that filing that document at the county recorder will satisfy a portion of a private registration process, the other portion will be a file that is maintained at my abode, this file is the official private registration. ANyone interested in a copy of it, can call, or mail at the address they will find in the public notice on file at the county recorder, (all copies are $3.00 and this debt can be discharged via check or money order ;-)

This filing also provides me a unique number.

Since the file number is linked to that file, if it was used on a plate, this would satisfy the requirment of being identifiable at a distance.

See, it is in our best interest to be able to find people in the event of a hit and run or other such events... and unless people provide a way on their own, or use the states service, does anyone really want them on the road anyways?

As to the requirement for ID... seems to be a good time to consider the age old wisdom "Chose your battles wisely.", yet idealy speaking, having to get a licence, where we all have a right, is inconsistant with reality.

Again, If you have the ability to do something, and while doing it, you don't wrong anyone, there you find a right.

We have the ability to make use of the common way, and so long as we honor the rights of others while traveling on it, there are no accidents.

We find, sadly, that not everyone honors the rights of others.

If people don't, we need a way to find them if they don't take responsability for their actions in the even of an accident.

This is common sense and many would say common sense is common law as well.

P.S.

The people that I have actualy met that have had any success with protecting their right to travel were doing a similar process to the simple idea that I presented above, it was done via the UCC, sorry I don't have all the details on that, yet the jist seemed to be that there is a number derived from the UCC filing and this is used on one's private plates.

I think success in this mostly boils down to maintaining the ability to hold someone accountable in the event of an accident.

[ezrhythm]

ndusa wrote;
But telling me I'm wrong...
I don't remember telling you that. My apologeez if I came across zat way. I only intend to present as I see it.
It's up to each one of us to decide for ourselves what is right and what is wrong.

Provide case law...
The use of the highway for the purpose of travel and transportation is not a mere privilege, but a common fundamental right of which the public and individuals cannot rightfully be deprived." Chicago Motor Coach v. Chicago, 169 NE 221

The right of the citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, either by carriage or by automobile, is not a mere privilege which a city may prohibit or permit at will, but a common law right which he has under the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Thompson v. Smith, 154 SE 579.

The right to travel is a part of the liberty of which the citizen cannot be deprived without due process of law under the Fifth Amendment." Kent v. Dulles, 357 US 116, 125.

[ndusa]

Originally Posted by ezrhythm

ndusa wrote;
But telling me I'm wrong...
I don't remember telling you that. My apologeez if I came across zat way. I only intend to present as I see it.
It's up to each one of us to decide for ourselves what is right and what is wrong.

Provide case law...
The use of the highway for the purpose of travel and transportation is not a mere privilege, but a common fundamental right of which the public and individuals cannot rightfully be deprived." Chicago Motor Coach v. Chicago, 169 NE 221

The right of the citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, either by carriage or by automobile, is not a mere privilege which a city may prohibit or permit at will, but a common law right which he has under the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Thompson v. Smith, 154 SE 579.

The right to travel is a part of the liberty of which the citizen cannot be deprived without due process of law under the Fifth Amendment." Kent v. Dulles, 357 US 116, 125.

I've read those as well. I'm tired, so I hope this doesn't come off harsh.

The problem with those cases, is they were decided BEFORE the federal government granted the states the right to regulate the highways. This is where montana has beat it down.

You can go to the montana supreme court website, just type in montana supreme court, and when you do your search on opinions, just type in "right to travel", which brings up more than just these kinds of cases, but sift threw them. Save the ones that pertain to this issue, and then when you have time read them over.

If I wasn't at work, I would download a bunch, but its late, and not my computers lol.

The state has a right, and the supremes are using it to thier advantage, right or wrong, thats how it is. To even try to argue these old cases to them is useless, as they won't hear an appeal on it. That is the point i'm tring to make with my babble here.

[ndusa]

Originally Posted by aksis

I can understand why people would be having a hard time just ripping the plates off their car and doing a 100mph down the road.

I can see the wisdom in requiring that the cars be identifiable at a distance, yet... the state is providing this services, at a fee, in it's corporate capacity, and if the state has such a power, then I have it as well...

I don't see what would prevent someone from doing a private registration - a notarized document, filed in the public record, notice sent to a few select state offices, create notorized identification (ID# = number of the private registration filing), and then create a plate [flag], that uses the filing number... all via our own inherent administrative powers, abilities, and rights, Or, one could use the DMV's services... (they are mighty fine, to say the least, just sign on the line, and attach the leash.)

If we have the ability to do something, and while doing it, we don't wrong anyone, there we find a right.

Rights superceed statutes.

I have the ability to create a written work, and it could be created to described in detail: that the document is a notice of private registration, describe who I am and how to contact me, the details of a certian car, and notice of the private registration I will be maintaining on the property in my private records, signed and sealed with a finger print.

I believe that filing that document at the county recorder will satisfy a portion of a private registration process, the other portion will be a file that is maintained at my abode, this file is the official private registration. ANyone interested in a copy of it, can call, or mail at the address they will find in the public notice on file at the county recorder, (all copies are $3.00 and this debt can be discharged via check or money order ;-)

This filing also provides me a unique number.

Since the file number is linked to that file, if it was used on a plate, this would satisfy the requirment of being identifiable at a distance.

See, it is in our best interest to be able to find people in the event of a hit and run or other such events... and unless people provide a way on their own, or use the states service, does anyone really want them on the road anyways?

As to the requirement for ID... seems to be a good time to consider the age old wisdom "Chose your battles wisely.", yet idealy speaking, having to get a licence, where we all have a right, is inconsistant with reality.

Again, If you have the ability to do something, and while doing it, you don't wrong anyone, there you find a right.

We have the ability to make use of the common way, and so long as we honor the rights of others while traveling on it, there are no accidents.

We find, sadly, that not everyone honors the rights of others.

If people don't, we need a way to find them if they don't take responsability for their actions in the even of an accident.

This is common sense and many would say common sense is common law as well.

P.S.

The people that I have actualy met that have had any success with protecting their right to travel were doing a similar process to the simple idea that I presented above, it was done via the UCC, sorry I don't have all the details on that, yet the jist seemed to be that there is a number derived from the UCC filing and this is used on one's private plates.

I think success in this mostly boils down to maintaining the ability to hold someone accountable in the event of an accident.

I agree to some degree. We gave the government power, they are SUPPOSED to intrepret the laws and make decisions for the better of all. NOw,we know thats not happening, but this is government.

As far a ucc filing in montana, forget about it. They don't accept them, and thats another theory they are not fond of. Just a warning before anyone in montana tries to file one of those(You might get free room and board if the prosecutor has a HO for ya!) Or they might just drag you outside and pistol whip you. Just a warning(yes, the police will beat you up, and you can't seem to do much about it, look at billingsgazette.com, and read some of the opinions at times, its not just me, everyone in Montana knows they are corrupt, and you really have no where to go when you get in that position, I've been there)

[charlesa6]

[quote=ndusa]

As far a ucc filing in montana, forget about it. They don't accept them, and thats another theory they are not fond of.

I believe I mention this before, if one entity disagrees, others will agree. You just have to shop around period.

[aksis]

Originally Posted by ndusa

I agree to some degree. We gave the government power, they are SUPPOSED to intrepret the laws and make decisions for the better of all. NOw,we know thats not happening, but this is government.

The more I look at it, the more I come to the conclusion that we didn't give power to government (you may have), We created it for a specific purpose, and delegated duties to it... the people in government already have the various power[s], just like we still do. The ability to do something is the inherent power to do it.

Originally Posted by ndusa

As far a ucc filing in montana, forget about it. They don't accept them, and thats another theory they are not fond of.

Obviously it is not a theory, and just because they don't do the filings dosn't mean that a) the security agreements aren't considered filed anyways, or b) that the filings are being rejected in other state[s].

§ 9-516. WHAT CONSTITUTES FILING; EFFECTIVENESS OF FILING.

(a) [What constitutes filing.]

Except as otherwise provided in subsection (b), communication of a record to a filing office and tender of the filing fee *or* acceptance of the record by the filing office constitutes filing.

[ They don't refuse according to subsection (b), from what I have seen and experienced, it's usualy a reason they make up (get it in writing), thus the presentment of the security agreement and tendering the fee to the SoS constitutes filing. ]

Originally Posted by ndusa

just a warning before anyone in montana tries to file one of those(You might get free room and board if the prosecutor has a HO for ya!) Or they might just drag you outside and pistol whip you. Just a warning(yes, the police will beat you up, and you can't seem to do much about it, look at billingsgazette.com, and read some of the opinions at times, its not just me, everyone in Montana knows they are corrupt, and you really have no where to go when you get in that position, I've been there)

You keep saying "you" in this post, and all you can realy say is "me" or "I".

You appear to me to be a little hopeless, and ruled by fear. It might be wise to adjust your thinking process. Thought preceeds manifestation.

[ndusa]

Originally Posted by aksis

The more I look at it, the more I come to the conclusion that we didn't give power to government (you may have), We created it for a specific purpose, and delegated duties to it... the people in government already have the various power[s], just like we still do. The ability to do something is the inherent power to do it.


Obviously it is not a theory, and just because they don't do the filings dosn't mean that a) the security agreements aren't considered filed anyways, or b) that the filings are being rejected in other state[s].


You keep saying "you" in this post, and all you can realy say is "me" or "I".

You appear to me to be a little hopeless, and ruled by fear. It might be wise to adjust your thinking process. Thought preceeds manifestation.

Hopeless? People who file crap paper work are hopeless. You can not contract with yourself, the ucc-1 issue was beat down in the 90's. I don't care what flakey theory is floating around out there on this, its crap. AND YES IT IS THEORY DEVELOPED BY A LAME BRAIN IN OREGON IN THE 80's.

The government is soveriegn, not you. Thats reality, look into it. Power is derived from the PEOPLE as a whole, not the small percent of social missfits whith rediculouse theory's of how to get out of responsability.