Can you issue your own DL ???

[DCLXVI]

The answer is no. Look up the definition of license. You cannot license yourself.

Originally Posted by Bouvier's Dictionary

LICENSE, International law. An authority given by one of two belligerent parties, to the citizens or subjects of the other, to carry on a specified trade.

2. The effects of the license are to suspend or relax the rules of war to the extent of the authority given. It is the assumption of a state of peace to the extent of the license. In the country which grants them, licenses to carry on a pacific commerce are stricti juris, as being exceptions to the general rule; though they are not to be construed with pedantic accuracy, nor will every small deviation be held to vitiate the fair effect of them. 4 Rob. Rep. 8; Chitty, Law of Nat. 1 to 5, and 260; 1 Kent, Com. 164, 85.

[farmer_giles_of_ham]

The point is that driving is legal for holders of valid permits. So I could, in theory, license myself, in that I have 2 capacities, joined in the same person. It's pointless, so I simply have a valid permit from my home state or country, which is my own private freehold.

What's especially noteworthy, is that the SAME situation obtains outside America as well. I have a car in a foreign land (overseas) where the registration has been, officially, 'de-activated'. The possibility remains that it could be 're-activated', by following a certain procedure. On the registration card is stamped the legend, 'de-active for transit purpose' (thats my translation). So this is the very same state that creates all these vehicle codes with a loophole to 'de-activate a circulation permit', reducing the possibilities of locomotion from 'circulation', to 'transit'. Hmmm....

If I buy a car in one state and take it to another state I am going to have to travel without registration- I need to get the car to the other state in order to register it. Thats transit.

notice that 'circulation ' is what happens in commerce, whereas transit must be something simpler. Without an active registration there is no tax applicable, no domestic insurance requirements, no state insprection, etc.

from another, older post on this forum today I found what I had been looking for.

"...It said something like "absent the definition of a term in Federal law the definitions on this code apply". So I found the definition In United States Code, Title 18, Section 31(a)(6) it states: "The term motor vehicle means every description of carriage or other contrivance propelled or drawn by mechanical power and used for commercial purposes on the highways in the transportation of passengers, passengers and property, or property or cargo".

Section 31(a)(10) states: "The term 'used for commercial purpose' means the carriage of persons or property for any fare, fee, rate, charge or other consideration, or directly or indirectly in connection with any business, or other undertaking intended for profit".

These two above federal definitions negate and void all definitions of MOTOR VEHICLE as found in the California Motor Vehicle Code; for it states in Section 15210(i)(7): "IN THE ABSENCE OF A FEDERAL DEFINITION, existing definitions under this code shall apply..."

[David Merrill]

Originally Posted by farmer_giles_of_ham

The point is that driving is legal for holders of valid permits. So I could, in theory, license myself, in that I have 2 capacities, joined in the same person. It's pointless, so I simply have a valid permit from my home state or country, which is my own private freehold.

What's especially noteworthy, is that the SAME situation obtains outside America as well. I have a car in a foreign land where the registration has been, officially, 'de-activated'. The possibility remains that it could be 're-activated', by following a certain procedure. On the registration card is stamped the legend,
'de-active for transit purpose' (thats my translation). So this is the very same state that creates all these vehicle codes with a loophole to 'de-activate a circulation permit', reducing the possibilities of locomotion from 'circulation', to 'transit'. Hmmm....

If I buy a car in one state and take it to another state I am going to have to travel without registration- I need to get the car to the other state in order to register it. Thats transit.

notice that 'circulation ' is what happens in commerce, whereas transit must be something simpler. Without an active registration there is no tax applicable, no domestic insurance requirements, no state insprection, etc.

from another, older post on this forum today I found what I had been looking for.

"...It said something like "absent the definition of a term in Federal law the definitions on this code apply". So I found the definition In United States Code, Title 18, Section 31(a)(6) it states: "The term motor vehicle means every description of carriage or other contrivance propelled or drawn by mechanical power and used for commercial purposes on the highways in the transportation of passengers, passengers and property, or property or cargo".

Section 31(a)(10) states: "The term 'used for commercial purpose' means the carriage of persons or property for any fare, fee, rate, charge or other consideration, or directly or indirectly in connection with any business, or other undertaking intended for profit".

These two above federal definitions negate and void all definitions of MOTOR VEHICLE as found in the California Motor Vehicle Code; for it states in Section 15210(i)(7): "IN THE ABSENCE OF A FEDERAL DEFINITION, existing definitions under this code shall apply..."

Delightful!

Because attorning is alienation from the original estate that really justifies logically that there are two estates. One original and one artificial.

Therefore there are many many wonderful winning arguments and when applied in the domains of a black robed attorney I have heard them driving to defeat logic because it is not good for public policy. When I saw this taken to the Tenth Circuit in interlocutory fashion, the justices actually declined to behave counter to their "Brethren" in the trial court. That was the word I remember in their response - Brethren.

ATTORN. To turn. In the feudal law, to turn, or transfer homage and service from one lord to another. This is the act of feudatories, vassals, or tenants, upon the alienation of the estate.

The logic in your reasoning is good though. I would suggest one thing in perfecting it; keep to the definitions supporting the code you argue. The moment you pull a definition out of a law dictionary the prosecution (both DA and "Judge") will grab that out. I have had the judge refuse to let me go look in the law library after refusing to let me look at the definitions she had right there on her bench!


Regards,

David Merrill.

[goffertrap]

Originally Posted by farmer_giles_of_ham

The point is that driving is legal for holders of valid permits. So I could, in theory, license myself, in that I have 2 capacities, joined in the same person. It's pointless, so I simply have a valid permit from my home state or country, which is my own private freehold.

Well, we can all forge permits all day long. What kind of theory are you going under, that gives you, Farmer, any authority to issue ANYTHING pertainting to state run/federal funded highways? Please show us this law. (Not a theory, actual law, not out of the bible, or somebodies book who knows nothing about law)

I've been on this site for a whole 3 days, and the term "SPACE CADETS" comes to mind. WOW!

[David Merrill]

Originally Posted by goffertrap

Well, we can all forge permits all day long. What kind of theory are you going under, that gives you, Farmer, any authority to issue ANYTHING pertainting to state run/federal funded highways? Please show us this law. (Not a theory, actual law, not out of the bible, or somebodies book who knows nothing about law)

I've been on this site for a whole 3 days, and the term "SPACE CADETS" comes to mind. WOW!

Here you go.

"...the United States, ... within their respective districts, as well as upon the high seas; (a) saving to suitors, in all cases, the right of a common law remedy, where the common law is competent to give it; and shall also have exclusive original cognizance of all seizures on land,..." The First Judiciary Act; September 24, 1789; Chapter 20, page 77. The Constitution of the United States of America, Revised and Annotated - Analysis and Interpretation - 1982; Article III, §2, Cl. 1 Diversity of Citizenship, U.S. Government Printing Office document 99-16, p. 741.

I think you would have to be a little more patient to dispell a lifetime of conditioning. The basis, at least for my agreement is that under emergency conditions common law is incompetent. Suijuris by nature is at peace outside the actual theater of war.

So don't get me wrong Goffertrap. You are correct. Until sovereigns can register as ambassadors with the State Department, there really is not much sense in issuing a homemade driver license - at least for convincing any police you have the right to travel. Therefore I grew out of it as a phase a decade ago.

What one does is offer a Certificate of Search from the US district court on your true name. That is simply removal of the cause into competent common law.

http://friends-n-family-research.inf..._falsified.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.inf..._corrected.jpg



Regards,

David Merrill.

[goffertrap]

Originally Posted by David Merrill

Here you go.



I think you would have to be a little more patient to dispell a lifetime of conditioning. The basis, at least for my agreement is that under emergency conditions common law is incompetent. Suijuris by nature is at peace outside the actual theater of war.



Regards,

David Merrill.

Suijuris means nothing more than you have the rights that all others have at a majority age. Thats it. It has nothing to do with war. It actually shows the stupidity of someone when they use the term. You are ASSUMED to be suijuris at 18, unless it is proven other wise.

As for the rest, WHAT?? That isn't even in the ball park of answering my question. Driving is a privilage backed by hundreds, if not thousands of cases. Thus, how can one legally "draw up my own dl"? Try it, see what happens. It will entertaining reading the outcome, and what new hairbrained schemes that will come of it.

[mrg]

Originally Posted by goffertrap

Suijuris means nothing more than you have the rights that all others have at a majority age. Thats it. It has nothing to do with war. It actually shows the stupidity of someone when they use the term. You are ASSUMED to be suijuris at 18, unless it is proven other wise.

As for the rest, WHAT?? That isn't even in the ball park of answering my question. Driving is a privilage backed by hundreds, if not thousands of cases. Thus, how can one legally "draw up my own dl"? Try it, see what happens. It will entertaining reading the outcome, and what new hairbrained schemes that will come of it.

[David Merrill]

Originally Posted by goffertrap

Suijuris means nothing more than you have the rights that all others have at a majority age. Thats it. It has nothing to do with war. It actually shows the stupidity of someone when they use the term. You are ASSUMED to be suijuris at 18, unless it is proven other wise.

As for the rest, WHAT?? That isn't even in the ball park of answering my question. Driving is a privilage backed by hundreds, if not thousands of cases. Thus, how can one legally "draw up my own dl"? Try it, see what happens. It will entertaining reading the outcome, and what new hairbrained schemes that will come of it.

He is new here MRG. And like millions does not realize that the War of Rebellion never ended. It will not end until any state or confederation of states can secede peacefully from the Union.

So don't worry, I will let him educate himself about the Trading With the Enemy Act on his own. If he continues to try badgering me like I don't know what I am talking about, I will put him on my Ignore List and if people don't enjoy his posts, he will go away. Like Shoonra, being a law librarian she is always worth debating but I don't really get much of this new fellow.

For instance he says:

Driving is a privilage backed by hundreds, if not thousands of cases. Thus, how can one legally "draw up my own dl"?

Just after I said:

So don't get me wrong Goffertrap. You are correct. Until sovereigns can register as ambassadors with the State Department, there really is not much sense in issuing a homemade driver license - at least for convincing any police you have the right to travel. Therefore I grew out of it as a phase a decade ago.

Therefore I will simply presume he did not read my subsequent post and was responding to an earlier one. I mean really, the very definition of license inherently implies one subject going to a higher authority...

However he is a great example of somebody conditioned to believe he is Suijuris in character just because he can get government-granted privileges.



Regards,

David Merrill.

[goffertrap]

Originally Posted by David Merrill

He is new here MRG. And like millions does not realize that the War of Rebellion never ended. It will not end until any state or confederation of states can secede peacefully from the Union.

So don't worry, I will let him educate himself about the Trading With the Enemy Act on his own. If he continues to try badgering me like I don't know what I am talking about, I will put him on my Ignore List and if people don't enjoy his posts, he will go away. Like Shoonra, being a law librarian she is always worth debating but I don't really get much of this new fellow.

For instance he says:



Just after I said:



Therefore I will simply presume he did not read my subsequent post and was responding to an earlier one. I mean really, the very definition of license inherently implies one subject going to a higher authority...

However he is a great example of somebody conditioned to believe he is Suijuris in character just because he can get government-granted privileges.



Regards,

David Merrill.

And comming from someone such as yourself, "self-educated" in law, it's a hoot.

What has travel, which you brought, got to do with a dl??? Clearly, you don't know the difference between the two.

Next, you throw out "suijuris" again, which I never brought up. Only a child would run around using "suijuris", when in fact, when you turned 18, you are ASSUMED to be suijuris in any court until proven otherwise. Again, you don't seem to have a grasp of the word.

As far as this spew of "he'll learn". Again, what a hoot. I can stand on my own two feet, without an imaginary friend, or six "self taught sui's", and I do very, very well. My record in a court room stand's somewhere between 90-95% win, with only a few exceptions of a "loss". How bout you? Have you ever been in court? Will you be willing to post orders signed by REAL JUDGES (not some home made stamp you hide in the basement)

[David Merrill]

Originally Posted by goffertrap

And comming from someone such as yourself, "self-educated" in law, it's a hoot.

What has travel, which you brought, got to do with a dl??? Clearly, you don't know the difference between the two.

Next, you throw out "suijuris" again, which I never brought up. Only a child would run around using "suijuris", when in fact, when you turned 18, you are ASSUMED to be suijuris in any court until proven otherwise. Again, you don't seem to have a grasp of the word.

As far as this spew of "he'll learn". Again, what a hoot. I can stand on my own two feet, without an imaginary friend, or six "self taught sui's", and I do very, very well. My record in a court room stand's somewhere between 90-95% win, with only a few exceptions of a "loss". How bout you? Have you ever been in court? Will you be willing to post orders signed by REAL JUDGES (not some home made stamp you hide in the basement)

You are an attorney?

That explains a lot about you. I think now I understand a little better why the attorners on Quatloos always thought I was making up hundreds of voices in my head I call suitors; courts of competent jurisdiction. That was really the point I was making and maybe MRG too; there is no convincing you the court system with its suspended writs is incompetent. You are part of it. You are within it and cannot accept that the emergency has been ongoing since 1861.

http://friends-n-family-research.inf...and_Decree.rtf

What you call REAL JUDGEs are not. They are administrative magistrates.

But it is good that you are having fun with all this. I am glad. I just hope that the other reindeer will let you play after you are on my Ignore List. I suggest you read up on some of Shoonra's posts. Even in her same attorney mindset, being more of a reference librarian by habit, she often provides useful information about implementing remedy.


Regards,

David Merrill.


P.S.

I have been told that attorneys have told banks to close accounts with the wording "NON-NEGOTIABLE" in the endorsement.

If it was uneffective at redeeming lawful money, why would the attorneys even care?