NO LICENSE - PERFECTED LEGAL ARGUEMENT

[Sweed]

Gee whiz Shoonra, I don't have to have a drivers license here in Washinton to drive a Motor Vehicle for Non-Commercial purposes. The State must be slackin off on their duties again.

[2501]

there exists no contractual obligation to create a public.

[weishaupt1776]

Originally Posted by Shoonra

so the govt has a duty (actually, several duties) that its citizens expect it to discharge. One of these is to take steps to keep the streets and highways safe.

Is there a contract for this alleged duty which could be entered in a case that would meet the criteria of the Rules of Evidence in the same way, say a security company has a contract to protect premises?

Originally Posted by Shoonra

By the way, your particular questions do have answers. Mothers Against Drunk Drivers got its start when the mother of a girl killedby a drunk driver sued the local police for something akin to dereliction of duty

1. Would you agree that when some one is killed, that there is an injury in fact which is distinct and palpable and NOT hypothetical or conjectural?
   Was this injury fairly traceable to the police negligence?????
   If I go to the store without my license and come back w/o damaging anyone's life, liberty, and property; but a cop knew i didn't have the license, would there be a valid cause of action against me?
   Is there an injury fairly traceable to the cops negligence?
2. Shoonra, has there been a statistical data study which would establish a scientific correlation between lack of a license and injuries and police negligence?
   Could that be entered in as court evidence pursuant to the ROE?

[Shoonra]

Although police (or cities) are not ordinarily held liable for neglecting to enforce a law or neglecting to protect someone, there are notable exceptions. Offhand I don't know the technical distinction.

Certainly when someone is killed there is a tangible injury. When the streets become more dangerous generally, there is also an injury to just about everyone in the vicinity even though it may be less obvious or measurable; I believe the streets are made more dangerous, and nearby real estate loses value, when the police ignore drivers without licenses or who violate other traffic laws.

AAA and the Dept of Transportation have established that a very disproportionately large number of highway fatalities are attributable to unlicensed drivers.

[sabredrivr]

a city attorney once posed an interresting question to me;
if you don't believe speed limits are law do you believe it is ok for an individual to go flying 100 mph thru a busy school zone full of kids?
of course not!
but, if someone had a mind to do such a thing, a sign or a law will not prevent that someone from doing it!
only personal responsability & respect for life would.

there would be no need for testing if people would take responsability for their own actions.
this should be construed to mean; know what your doing behind the wheel before you take that machine on the road!
it's not the states responsability to ensure i am competent in/on my machine, it's mine!
responsability;the other side of the liberty coin.without one the other is gone.

i can recall no duty assigned to my government beyond providing for the common defense & protection of liberty.can you?
remember; if it's not written in the constitution, they can't do it!

all of this is just so much hubbub anyway.

the aforementioned "duties" of government have been perverted into excuses to further control & enslave the populace.
one step at a time OUR servants are further enslaving us.
first security camera's then redlight camera's. now speed control camera's on freeways.
imagine whats next: moral enforcement camera's in your home?
all it will take is a few favorable opinion polls & some more "liberally construed"
duties of the government......

[charlesa6]

sabredrivr, welcome to the forum!

[sabredrivr]

thanx for the welcome.i have been lurking & learning for a while.

Originally Posted by Shoonra

AAA and the Dept of Transportation have established that a very disproportionately large number of highway fatalities are attributable to unlicensed drivers.

the dot also established years ago that an accident caused by someone failing to stop at a stop sign is to be listed as caused by excessive speed.

do you actually trust statistics from such organizations?

i mean no dis-respect towards anyone but, statistics are but one tool of the empire.
a means to an end.

[RickA]

Certainly when someone is killed there is a tangible injury. When the streets become more dangerous generally, there is also an injury to just about everyone in the vicinity even though it may be less obvious or measurable; I believe the streets are made more dangerous, and nearby real estate loses value, when the police ignore drivers without licenses or who violate other traffic laws.
AAA and the Dept of Transportation have established that a very disproportionately large number of highway fatalities are attributable to unlicensed drivers.

Rubbish of the highest magnitude.

How do you quantify streets being more dangerous by men and women not having a license?

I do not want heresay.....prove it.

[Akira]

sabredrivr,

Welcome !

Originally Posted by Shoonra

AAA and the Dept of Transportation have established that a very disproportionately large number of highway fatalities are attributable to unlicensed drivers.

That stat is probably quite true... I'd be real interested to learning what percentage of those are alcohol related.

Are these "fatalities by unlicensed drivers" caused by:

a father of 2-4 kids who live with mom, lost his license for falling behind on child support, and is just trying to get to work?

or by people, who have, once or repeatedly, combined autos and alcohol?

I think the latter is much more likely.

Originally Posted by Shoonra

By its very nature, in a republic or a participatory democracy, a govt is elected by the citizens to do a variety of tasks

Also very true !! And we have citizens of both, in this geographical area sometimes known as America.


Which is a sweet little segway to bringing this thread back on track.


Sadly, many folks on this site, just like congress, fail to make clear, which jurisdiction they are refering to, when they offer opinions and observations..

Originally Posted by Shoonra

This argument is far from "perfected".

For use in which jurisdiction?

As a 14th amendment US federal slave citizen? in statuatory jurisdiction? I quite agree! You'd need a lot more than this arguement / brief to get you thru...

As a dejure state Citizen? using common law defaults to slamdunk all the statuatory presumptions? I could easily win using the contents of this doc, as it once again, puts the burden of proof on the PA/DA.


You can play in their sandbox, subject yourself to statuatory jurisdiction, carry the burden of proof, and use BT's excellent APA docs, for instance..... or you can stay outside of their sandbox, use common law, and leave the burden of proof to the so called 'injured party'

To each his own...



Shouldn't sovereign persecution be a hate crime?


For HIS Glory,
Akira

[RickA]

Akira, I wasn't disputing that accidents/fatalities do not occur, they do. I was questioning how someone, who does not have a license, in and of it self, is the cause of the dangerous streets. In other words, people not knowing, taking uneccessary risks or, not paying attention are the causes of the streets being dangerous. Licensed drivers cause the streets to be just as dangerous, in fact, more dangerous because there are more of them.

I am in no way saying that people who have never driven before should not be trained/taught.