Drivers license?

[scooterdog]

I got this off my travel CD. Any comments???




Do you really need a driver license?

The definition of a "license" is:

"A personal privilege to do some particular act or series of acts on Land without possessing any estate or interest therein, and is ordinarily revocable at the will of the licensor and is NOT assignable. The permission by competent authority to do an act which, without such permission, would be illegal or, a trespass, a tort, a clear violation of LAW and/or otherwise NOT ALLOWABLE UNDER ANY CONDITION." See People vs. Henderson, 391 Mich. 612, 218 N.W. 2nd 2 @4.

A permit granted by an appropriate governmental body, generally for a consideration, A FEE, to a person, firm, or Corporation to pursue some occupation or to carry on some business subject to regulation under the POLICE POWER of Government. See 9th & 10th Amendments of THE U.S. CONSTITUTION.

Pay special attention to the phrase "nor prohibited by it" as Rights previously guaranteed may not be enumerated away by addition onto the CONSTITUTION, or denied or disparaged away by adding onto it.

Now once upon a time in a Land not far away, IN THE NEW WORLD, there lived a people, who were ALL Kings and or Queens in their OWN RIGHT. Now as such they were truly blessed by GOD with Sovereign Rights, as FREE MEN AND WOMEN, which they all agreed should be written down on paper to preserve for ALL TIME, that Sovereign STATUS and ALL THE RIGHTS to be protected.

The Sovereign People, Kings and Queens all, called their Document THE CONSTITUTION so that ALL could see and know what was created. The Kings and Queens hired by election, trusted servants, ALL SWORN AND TRUE, TO ACT AS THE PROTECTORS OF THE CONSTITUTION. These FIDUCIARY TRUSTEES were to form a group of FIDUCIARY TRUSTEES, and were then SWORN TO PROTECT AND SERVE, and this was called THE GOVERNMENT, which was created entirely under the limits of THE CONSTITUTION granted by the power of the people.

Now take NOTICE OF WHAT HAS HAPPENED TO THAT HONEST AND NOBEL UNDERTAKING! Follow along and learn how you can bring back that original CONTRACT, and get back your Sovereign Status and the PROTECTED RIGHTS GUARANTEED TO YOU IN THAT CONSTITUTION.

What Changed? HOW DID IT HAPPEN? HOW did the Sovereign Citizen's protected RIGHTS GET CONVERTED INTO A mere PRIVILEGE and a requirement for a LICENSE or FEE for the exercise of that RIGHT be required for the exercise of that PRIVILEGE?

CLEARLY THIS IS FRAUD, PLAIN AND SIMPLE. FRAUD VISCHEATES THE MOST SACRED CONTRACT OR COVENANT! Has a FRAUD been done here? Oh yes ...

Here are United States Supreme Court decisions prohibiting this fraud by the states:

NO STATE may convert a RIGHT into a PRIVILEGE and require a LICENSE or FEE for the exercise of that RIGHT! See MURDOCK vs. PENNSYLVANIA, 319 U.S. 105

If a STATE does erroneously require A LICENSE OR FEE for exercise of that RIGHT, the Citizen may IGNORE THE LICENSE AND OR FEE and exercise the RIGHT WITH TOTAL IMPUNITY! See SCHUTTLESWORTH vs. BIRMINGHAM 373 U.S. 262.

YOU CAN NOT BE PUNISHED FOR THE EXERCISE OF A CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT! See MILLER vs. UNITED STATES 230 F2nd 486.

You have a PERFECT DEFENSE TO THE ELEMENT OF WILLFULLNESS if you rely on the advice of Counsel or upon a DECISION OF THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT AS A DEFENSE. See U.S. vs. BISHOP, 412 U.S. 346.

The Prosecution bears entirely the proof beyond a REASONABLE DOUBT and must prove WILLFUL INTENT TO AVOID A KNOWN DUTY OR TASK UNDER THE LAW. The prosecutor does NOT HAVE ANY CAUSE OF ACTION FOR WHICH A COURT OF LAW MAY GRANT RELIEF TO HIM/HER, and thereby has NO CASE AT LAW! See FAILURE TO STATE A CAUSE OF ACTION FOR WHICH RELIEF MAY BE GRANTED BY THE COURT.

The Constitution is required to be interpreted in favor of YOU, "THE CITIZEN" BENEFICIARY, FOR THE PROTECTION OF YOUR RIGHTS AND PROPERTY! See BYARS vs. UNITED STATES 273 U.S. 28 and 16th Am Juris Prudence 2nd Constitutional Section #97

Think about this and then make your decision, TO BE, OR NOT TO BE, A KING OR QUEEN, A SOVEREIGN, WITH ALL THE RIGHTS AND PROTECTIONS THAT GO WITH THIS STATUS.

Think about it, and then send that piece of plastic with the bad picture, back to the DMV with detailed instructions on exactly where they can shove it

[Ice]

Application for a DL is nothing more than a waiver of Right. It is not necessarily a "contract". All they need is "consent." Look! See how many folks have consented to GIVE UP THEIR RIGHT!

Ice

[Naackah]

So how do you p/reserve your right to travel freely, unlicensed and unregistered?

It is one thing to have the knowledge that you have the God-given right to travel freely in an automobile and to continue to do so without obtaining an operator's license or registering your private property, but how do you defend that right when harassed by "statute enforcers" who insist that their statues apply to you?

Do you simply argue that you were merely exercising your right to travel in an automobile as opposed to invoking a so-called privilege to drive a motor vehicle?

Will that get a case for a traffic violation dismissed or will they look at you like you're crazy and still slap a fine on you?

How do you effectively argue facts while, at the same time, shifting the burden of proof to the court and not admitting/granting jurisdiction?

Would you need to privatize your automobile to make your case stronger?

Am I asking too many questions or the wrong questions?

Please don't mistake my tone.

I Am Merely In Search of Something Applicable,

Naackah

[scooterdog]

I have a set of travel papers that I carry with me. Once I present them(when they demand the dl, ins. and reg). The cop is supposed to sign a couple of pages. Even if he doesn't, it is evidence, and he would have a duty to attach the travel papers to the ticket.

Ok, so he doesn't, looks at me crazy, and writes a bs ticket anyway. I simply file the papers myself, and they are going to have one heck of a time getting past my Aff., so "in theory", it should never go to trial. Again, I worked my ass off on these papers, and haven't had to use them as of yet, but can't wait until I do!

[Akira]

Originally Posted by Naackah

So how do you p/reserve your right to travel freely, unlicensed and unregistered?

The answers you seek are on this forum...

You might try starting in the success stories section and working backwards...


For HIS Glory,
Akira

Scooterdog: I admire the fact that you have admitted that your theoretical paperwork has not been tested nor confirmed in a court of law (commonlaw or otherwise). When you do have such verification of the effectiveness of your paperwork, then I for one, would be much interested in reading that paperwork. So, please, when it is tested and documented in court, advise us with a scanned copy of court documentation that would verify your claim.

Akira: Your advice to others with regard to the alleged 'success stories' is well taken. On the otherhand, I would still like to see verification from any court of law with regard to those alleged wins, wherein the court has stipulated that the court dismissed for this reason or that reason. Though many in this forum allege to have won an issue in court, they fail to present any formal paperwork(court records) to verify their claims. At most, they allege that this theory or that theory worked and that others should follow suit and spend money(frn's) to purchase the procedure utilized and alleged to have been the reason for the 'success'. My only question to those is this; "why should I spend one thin dime on something that is thus far unproven, unverified, and lacking in documentation that would make the expenditure a competent decision?"

Jerry

[KITCHIE]

Jerry,

You will never see a win that could be relied upon. What you will discover is that when you have overwhelming evidence stating your case, and you feel you will get a judgement based on the evidence you produce, they dismiss it.

Kitchie

Originally Posted by KITCHIE

Jerry,

You will never see a win that could be relied upon. What you will discover is that when you have overwhelming evidence stating your case, and you feel you will get a judgement based on the evidence you produce, they dismiss it.

Kitchie

I guess then there is a problem area. If the 'win' cannot be confirmed and that alleged win was based on some purchased procedural theory package, then why should anyone be expected to accept the word of someone that is obviously interested in the further exploitation of the fiat money system (attempting to pursuade others to purchase the package)?

Surely, the court must maintain some form of record showing that the case was dismissed. Based on my own interaction with the various courts, that record also showed why the case was dismissed. An example available on this forum is the Sara Fugate case. The records are made available and everyone can clearly ascertain the facts from the documents provided. These others, are merely making allegations of 'success' and not providing any documentation to prove one way or the other the REAL status of their case.

IMHO, these clams that are being shuffled around are not enough to make clam chowder. The other ingredients are not being made known, while the claim of a completed product is being made available (the claim of success) for us to savor and act as a seduction to purchase a pre-mixed package; we are not made knowledgeable of whether or not there are some ingredients that could prove to be potentially harmful to our personal welfare. If you get the gist of what I am saying. It is a proven fact, that what works for one may or may not work for another. Buyer beware.

Jerry

[scooterdog]

Jerrypitts:

There is a guy using the same papers in western Mont. That has had the police hand them back on 2 seperate occ. and sent him on his way. The other time, the court dismissed it.

Proof? Not really. its going to depend on the cop, the judge, how far they want to go. I looked threw alot of Supreme Court Rulings in Montana, and they just don't agree with me lol. I still beg to differ, on a couple of diff. travel briefs I have.

Sorry I can't get you documentation, and chances are, they would never, ever admitt the papers work, it will be some other bs excuse. But, if a day comes that I use my papers and it works, I will put it on here.

Here is just part of one of a couple of briefs I have ready. suijuris.net/forum/travel/7839-wa-driving-privilege-they-grant-you-6.html#post74484

[mrg]

Originally Posted by scooterdog

Jerrypitts:



Here is just part of one of a couple of briefs I have ready.

http://www.suijuris.net/forum/74466-post59.html

This one?

I would like to see those other pages; maybe they could be uploaded into the members download area somehow.


Interesting trivia:

Highway. A free and public roadway or street; one which every person has the right to use.
Kimes By and Through Kimes v. Herrin, 217 Mont. 330, 705 P.2d 108, 110.
Black's Law Dictionary 6th Edition (emphasis added).

(There is that ubiquitous term "person," however, it is modified by the term "every."

Also, there is the infinitive "to use."

Compare the meaning of "right to use" when the infinitive is pronounced "to yooz" and when the infinitive is pronounced "to yoos."
There is a subtle difference.)

Highwayman. A bandit: one who robs travelers upon the highway.
Anderson v. Hartford Accident and Indemnity Co., 77 Cal.App. 641, 247 P. 507, 510. (See also Hijacking.)
Black's Law Dictionary 6th Edition (emphasis added).

(food for thought or nought)