• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Favor Owed--Fourth Amendment dot Com

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,278
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
Several years ago, the host of FourthAmendment.com, an experienced litigator and criminal defense attorney, commented favorably on a post of mine.

Here is my chance to repay the favor.

Below is a quote from his blog which follows 4th Amendment (search and seizure) cases around the country. Emphasis added by me.


Transfer of a gun on the street which appeared to be prearranged suggested criminal activity, and thus was reasonable suspicion. Commonwealth v. Suriel, 2017 Mass. App. LEXIS 73 (May 26, 2017). (This is Massachusetts. In an open carry state, this certainly wouldn’t mean anywhere near as much. Also, it’s reasonable suspicion, not probable cause.)


http://fourthamendment.com/?p=27339

In case this pings back, thank you, Mr. Hall. Thank you very, very much for maintaining FourthAmendment.com.
 
Last edited:

countryclubjoe

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
2,505
Location
nj
With the recent arrest of Tiger Woods, for alleged DUI, it has come to my attention and in my opinion, that refusing to take a breathalyzer test, should not be an immediate reason for an arrest and or a reason for having ones driving privilege revoked..

In June 2016, the Supremes articulated that a Refusal to take the breathalyzer was NOT an "unreasonable" intrusion,and therefore did not violate the 4th amendment.. While I disagree totally, there still exist other individual rights, for example the 5th amendment right too not incriminate oneself.

So my question, again, refers to the entering into a contract, the contract being, the purchase of the privilege to drive aka the state issued license..

Currently states automatically revoke the privilege of a person that refuses to take said test.. While this is probably more of a civil matter, one should still be afforded the right to not incriminate oneself, both in civil matters and obviously criminal matters..

How many folks here actually read the by laws when obtaining their privilege to drive?.. Do we surrender 4th and 5th amendment rights, when we enter into a quasi-contract with the State?..

Exercising a right, should not be transformed into a crime.. Is that contract or license you signed, a free pass for the state and courts to violate your rights?.. It appears yes.. My .02

Thoughts please.

Regards
CCJ
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,278
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
With the recent arrest of Tiger Woods, for alleged DUI, it has come to my attention and in my opinion, that refusing to take a breathalyzer test, should not be an immediate reason for an arrest and or a reason for having ones driving privilege revoked..

In June 2016, the Supremes articulated that a Refusal to take the breathalyzer was NOT an "unreasonable" intrusion,and therefore did not violate the 4th amendment.. While I disagree totally, there still exist other individual rights, for example the 5th amendment right too not incriminate oneself.

So my question, again, refers to the entering into a contract, the contract being, the purchase of the privilege to drive aka the state issued license..

Currently states automatically revoke the privilege of a person that refuses to take said test.. While this is probably more of a civil matter, one should still be afforded the right to not incriminate oneself, both in civil matters and obviously criminal matters..

How many folks here actually read the by laws when obtaining their privilege to drive?.. Do we surrender 4th and 5th amendment rights, when we enter into a quasi-contract with the State?..

Exercising a right, should not be transformed into a crime.. Is that contract or license you signed, a free pass for the state and courts to violate your rights?.. It appears yes.. My .02

Thoughts please.

Regards
CCJ
+1

The true test is whether you can drive unmolested by government without having entered into such a contract. If government can deny your right to travel, or can attach such conditions as breathylizer test or blood test to obtaining a license, then it can hardly genuinely voluntary consent.
 
Last edited:

countryclubjoe

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
2,505
Location
nj
+1

The true test is whether you can drive unmolested by government without having entered into such a contract. If government can deny your right to travel, or can attach such conditions as breathylizer test or blood test to obtaining a license, then it can hardly genuinely voluntary consent.

Interesting to note, that currently four states require a law abiding citizen to be "finger printed" for the privilege of acquiring a DL, California, Colorado,Georgia, and Texas..( Cite Google)..

People need to wake up to the DMV scam..

My .02
Regards
CCJ
 

countryclubjoe

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
2,505
Location
nj
There is a right to travel implicit in the 1A Freedom of Assembly, but there is no right to drive, to hazard the public by use of a hazardous mechanism. No more that there is a right to possess hazardous or toxic mechanisms like anthrax or plutonium.

There is no contract in issuance of a DL. You are licensed to use the public commons subject to certain requirements.

YOU must differentiate IS from OUGHT. My opinion, and as I read the law.
I think we need to determine, what is" driving" and what is " traveling".

See Thomas v Smith 154 SE 579-- " 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/state 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..

See Hertado v California.. 110 U.S. 516, The Supremes state very plainly, " The state cannot diminish rights of the people"..

The State will use the term "driving".. The pro liberty, pro individual rights citizen will use the term " traveling"..

My .02
CCJ
 

countryclubjoe

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
2,505
Location
nj
There exist some informative information on youtube, concerning the argument of right to travel without a license.

One such poster uses the nom de plume of " mycountryislost"--- My Country is lost..

Very thought provoking information on the topic.

My .02
CCJ
 

utbagpiper

Banned
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
4,061
Location
Utah
I think we need to determine, what is" driving" and what is " traveling".

See Thomas v Smith 154 SE 579-- " 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/state 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..

See Hertado v California.. 110 U.S. 516, The Supremes state very plainly, " The state cannot diminish rights of the people"..

The State will use the term "driving".. The pro liberty, pro individual rights citizen will use the term " traveling"..
I've heard this line of claims for 30 years now. I've yet to find anyone who can or will do the following:

1-Demonstrate that he consistently operates his own motor-vehicle of reasonably high value on the public roads without a license without negative legal consequence; and

2-Is willing to clearly and publicly educate others on how to do likewise.

I've know those who drive without a license, in a vehicle registered to a spouse or other relative. I've known those who forego registration or use counterfeit plates on a $500 jalopy that simply isn't worth impounding, while also living a life of self-imposed poverty so as to be "judgment proof". I've known those who claimed to be doing #1, but were never willing to public and clearly educate others.

I contrast that with those of us in the RKBA community when it comes to complying with laws regarding the OC or CC of firearms. Even where the answer is, "What isn't prohibited is permitted and nothing prohibits OC (or CC) of a gun in your circumstances," most are more than willing to walk through available statutes to make clear what is or isn't legal, or to cite binding case law in the jurisdiction in question, or to recount typical cultural and legal reactions. It is not uncommon for OCers to offer to meet a newbie for lunch somewhere to OC a bit together.

If the licensing of driving a private automobile for private purposes is a scam, it is either so well hidden or so well enforced as to no longer be a scam, but rather the actual law.

I'd love not to be subject to the hassles and costs of the DMV or Drivers License Division. At the same time, there is a material difference in terms of risks to the general public between walking, cycling, riding a horse or driving a carriage or wagon, vs driving a 2000+ pound automobile at 80 mph.

If there is a right to drive without license, please feel free to demonstrate to me and to educate me very publicly. Anyone who can't or won't do those two things, should really stop talking about in terms of whet they think the law is and instead stick to what they think the law ought to be.
 

countryclubjoe

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
2,505
Location
nj
I've heard this line of claims for 30 years now. I've yet to find anyone who can or will do the following:

1-Demonstrate that he consistently operates his own motor-vehicle of reasonably high value on the public roads without a license without negative legal consequence; and

2-Is willing to clearly and publicly educate others on how to do likewise.

I've know those who drive without a license, in a vehicle registered to a spouse or other relative. I've known those who forego registration or use counterfeit plates on a $500 jalopy that simply isn't worth impounding, while also living a life of self-imposed poverty so as to be "judgment proof". I've known those who claimed to be doing #1, but were never willing to public and clearly educate others.

I contrast that with those of us in the RKBA community when it comes to complying with laws regarding the OC or CC of firearms. Even where the answer is, "What isn't prohibited is permitted and nothing prohibits OC (or CC) of a gun in your circumstances," most are more than willing to walk through available statutes to make clear what is or isn't legal, or to cite binding case law in the jurisdiction in question, or to recount typical cultural and legal reactions. It is not uncommon for OCers to offer to meet a newbie for lunch somewhere to OC a bit together.

If the licensing of driving a private automobile for private purposes is a scam, it is either so well hidden or so well enforced as to no longer be a scam, but rather the actual law.

I'd love not to be subject to the hassles and costs of the DMV or Drivers License Division. At the same time, there is a material difference in terms of risks to the general public between walking, cycling, riding a horse or driving a carriage or wagon, vs driving a 2000+ pound automobile at 80 mph.

If there is a right to drive without license, please feel free to demonstrate to me and to educate me very publicly. Anyone who can't or won't do those two things, should really stop talking about in terms of whet they think the law is and instead stick to what they think the law ought to be.
Charles
The problem is simply, that the system is rigged.. Also unknowing folks buy into the rigged system.
The judges, the DMV, the prosecutors, the public defenders, the road predators, (aka) the cops.. Are making a great living off the scam..

I have not had the so called privilege of driving now, for about 22 years.. I have no license.. However I follow the laws of the road..
In my 22 years, I have won (3) driving without a privilege cases.. Surely they are not published, the powers, to-be simply dismiss any case, where the defendant is knowledgeable of his/her rights.. The scam shall continue, simply because folks, like yourself, buy into the corrupt system.
I cannot be a patriot for sheep, I can only exercise my OWN RIGHTS, sheep don't question their masters, they purchase, licenses, permits and other quasi documents, then they claim they are law abiding citizens.. I beg to differ, if a law abiding citizen is purchasing a privilege, and surrendering a natural, constitutional right, for a mere government issue privilege, than they in theory are the pawns in the scam.. Yes, they may be law abiding, however they are SHEEP and they support their masters..

I travel to the beat of my own freedom.. I shall not/never surrender a Right, for a government issued privilege..

Caveat, I have the legal knowledge and infinite finances to fight, the petty tyrants.. Your results may differ.

" Men should not petition for rights, but exercise and take them'.. Thomas Paine

' Those who expect to reap the blessing's of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it"..THOMAS PAINE.

Charles, it is MEN that must undergo fatigue, sheep simply pay their dues and cry..

Always a pleasure Sir!

My .02
Regards
CCJ
 
Last edited:

utbagpiper

Banned
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
4,061
Location
Utah
I have not had the so called privilege of driving now, for about 22 years.. I have no license.. However I follow the laws of the road..
In my 22 years, I have won (3) driving without a privilege cases.. Surely they are not published, the powers, to-be simply dismiss any case, where the defendant is knowledgeable of his/her rights.. The scam shall continue, simply because folks, like yourself, buy into the corrupt system.
Or perhaps the scam will continue because folks, like yourself, who claim to have figured it out would rather toss insults than engage in education of others.

Claiming you've done it is far different than posting details of how you've done it. A dismissed case should have a written order from the judge. Redact your personal info and post the orders.

Provide some real instruction on how others might legally go about doing likewise.

This site has a rule against advocating for violation of the law. At first pass, it appears the law requires a driver license to operate a motor vehicle on the road. If that law is being misapplied to private owners "traveling" then surely you have nothing to lose by providing some education, just as most of us provide whatever help and education we can when someone has a question about legally carrying or potentially having to use a gun for self defense.


I cannot be a patriot for sheep, I can only exercise my OWN RIGHTS, sheep don't question their masters, ..
You can also stop with insults, climb down off your high horse, and assist others in gaining the knowledge needed, just as most here do in the arena of RKBA.

Caveat, I have the legal knowledge and infinite finances to fight, the petty tyrants.. Your results may differ.
Finances are a private matter, but legal knowledge can and should be shared with others.

Please, enlighten me and the others on the forum who could benefit from your knowledge.

Charles
 

countryclubjoe

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
2,505
Location
nj
Or perhaps the scam will continue because folks, like yourself, who claim to have figured it out would rather toss insults than engage in education of others.

Claiming you've done it is far different than posting details of how you've done it. A dismissed case should have a written order from the judge. Redact your personal info and post the orders.

Provide some real instruction on how others might legally go about doing likewise.

This site has a rule against advocating for violation of the law. At first pass, it appears the law requires a driver license to operate a motor vehicle on the road. If that law is being misapplied to private owners "traveling" then surely you have nothing to lose by providing some education, just as most of us provide whatever help and education we can when someone has a question about legally carrying or potentially having to use a gun for self defense.




You can also stop with insults, climb down off your high horse, and assist others in gaining the knowledge needed, just as most here do in the arena of RKBA.



Finances are a private matter, but legal knowledge can and should be shared with others.

Please, enlighten me and the others on the forum who could benefit from your knowledge.

Charles
You heard the saying, you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink... Also regarding your insult comment, please be advised, I only return the insults to those few that sling them FIRST at me.. I can articulate a civil discourse with the best of em, however I cannot stand-by and allow a few un-convivial types, to continue with their scurrilous attacks of me and others on this board.

Like you, I prefer conviviality over aversion however I shall address all insults with the utmost confutation. We can agree that all of us here support each other in matters of the second amendment, that is our bond, however, concerning other topics, issues, there exist much chasm among us. In debating some of those issues, topics, some here tend to be pugnacious as opposed to being civil towards folks that don't hold the same ideas or
opinions thereon. I too have been truculent at times.. We can only hope for the good of this board, that all the guilty herein, endeavor to debate in a civil apropos matter. My .50

Regards Sir!
CCJ
 

utbagpiper

Banned
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
4,061
Location
Utah
You heard the saying, you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink...
So are you going to provide any education to the board on this topic?

Also regarding your insult comment, please be advised, I only return the insults to those few that sling them FIRST at me...

Like you, I prefer conviviality over aversion however I shall address all insults with the utmost confutation.
You used terms like "sheep" in responding to me. That is clearly an insult? Where did I insult you? I challenged you to provide evidence that you actually live what you claim is the law and to provide education to the rest of us on how to follow suite. I did not insult.

So, moving beyond insults I'll ask again:

Will you please provide some solid education to the board regarding exercising our rights to "travel" upon public roads in our motor vehicles and avoiding the "scam" of buying licensed privileges?

Thank you

Charles
 

countryclubjoe

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
2,505
Location
nj
So are you going to provide any education to the board on this topic?



You used terms like "sheep" in responding to me. That is clearly an insult? Where did I insult you? I challenged you to provide evidence that you actually live what you claim is the law and to provide education to the rest of us on how to follow suite. I did not insult.

So, moving beyond insults I'll ask again:

Will you please provide some solid education to the board regarding exercising our rights to "travel" upon public roads in our motor vehicles and avoiding the "scam" of buying licensed privileges?

Thank you

Charles
Charles
You are an intelligent fellow, let youtube and google and case law be your guide along with your own independent thinking, As I mentioned, my results
and other folks results may vary, IE, I have the time and finances to fight at the kangaroo court level, and beyond, others may not have such a luxury, I can articulate both in oral arguments and written briefs on my own, again, others may not have the same luxury..

Educating folks on their rights and than expecting folks to defend said rights in a court is like attempting to teach folks how to play poker at the highest level.. It simply cannot be taught.. Both require balls and playing by the seat of his/her pants.. While also putting ones liberty and finances in jeopardy.

Liberty and freedom can only be acquired thru individual sacrifice and due diligence, or by employing a team of liberty minded barristers.. However bear in mind that all attorney's pledge allegiance to the bar, aka the system.. I, on the hand, have only allegiance to myself and my posterity.

Again, please let me state, I do not ever do any business, with the federal, state or local government, I shall not, even out of fear, give said government jurisdiction over me or my property. I denounce any and all quasi laws that require licensing, permits or supervision by a government entity, that subjects a citizen to surrender" a right, for a government issued privilege".. I refuse to do business with any government agency.

Please be advised, my results and results of others may vary.

Be advised accordingly.

My .02
Regards
CCJ
 

since9

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
Messages
6,964
Location
Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
Or perhaps the scam will continue because folks, like yourself, who claim to have figured it out would rather toss insults than engage in education of others.

Claiming you've done it is far different than posting details of how you've done it. A dismissed case should have a written order from the judge. Redact your personal info and post the orders.

Provide some real instruction on how others might legally go about doing likewise.

This site has a rule against advocating for violation of the law. At first pass, it appears the law requires a driver license to operate a motor vehicle on the road. If that law is being misapplied to private owners "traveling" then surely you have nothing to lose by providing some education, just as most of us provide whatever help and education we can when someone has a question about legally carrying or potentially having to use a gun for self defense.

You can also stop with insults, climb down off your high horse, and assist others in gaining the knowledge needed, just as most here do in the arena of RKBA.

Finances are a private matter, but legal knowledge can and should be shared with others.

Please, enlighten me and the others on the forum who could benefit from your knowledge.

Charles
I second these motions! I think most responsible drivers would like to give the DMV the boot.

Our would we? Might the DMV not actually provide a useful function? I mean, just how long does it take someone to learn to drive a car, safely? Is driver training their only function? Are we getting our money's worth?

I, for one, don't think so. My last trip to the DMV cost me $117, and for what? Yet another 3/4"x1" sticker? "Oh, do you need new plates with that?" "No Ma'am. They still look brand new." To keep me in the system? Heck, my sheriff does that with my CHP for 1/10th the price (less than $50 every five years i.e. $10 a year vs $100+ dollars every year). So, what is the DMV doing wrong that they're so darn inefficient?

Well, for starters, how about not making me re-register my vehicle every year. If I move, I'll tell you. If I sell it, I'll tell you. By "you" I mean the DMV. If I get into an accident, well, the cops will probably tell you. In the meantime, leave me alone and stop wasting my time and money.

But I'm curious, so I looked it up: "The DMV is a state-level government agency that administers vehicle registration and driver licensing." Terrific. Since my drivers' license is good for five years, same as my CHP, just make my vehicle registration good for five years and stop wasting my time and money.

Let's look a little further...

Here in Colorado, the DMV belongs to the Colorado Department of Revenue. Well, if that isn't a laugh... That's one of the biggest problems right there. Try putting it under an organization responsible for public safety rather than an organized charged with collecting money.

Areas of Responsibility:

1. Drivers' licenses and identification: I've been licensed for 39 years. I know how to keep from losing it. However, if I need to show ID, I usually reach for my military ID card. I do not have any inherent need to be relicensed every year, nor is our DMV doing that.

2. Driver certification: Initially, 39 years ago, permanently when I turned 16. When I returned from overseas, had to be recertified, an exercise I found completely unnecessary, having earned a 100% on the test and where the tester "corrected" me several times on points where the book said otherwise. I bit my tongue.

3. Vehicle registration: I tend to keep my vehicles for quite a while. I've had my current truck for ten years, and it only has 82,000 miles on it. Driving is expensive! So, I let my fingers do the walking, live near a grocery store, close to my loved ones, and plan trips rather than darting back and forth all over the city on a whim. I'm reading, "A vehicle registration program tracks detailed vehicle information such as odometer history in order to prevent automobile-related crimes such as odometer fraud." Oh, horsehockey! Is that even a thing anymore? Was that ever a thing? It doesn't cost the DMV $117 to record my odometer every year. In fact, I don't recall them even asking. If they really need to do so, it doesn't cost more than about $10 for someone to check my registration, look at my truck, plates, VIN, and record my odometer before entering the latter into the computer. Everything else is already in the computer, so, "No change," and if it does, I'll let you know.

4. Vehicle ownership: If I sell it, I'll let you know.

5. Law enforcement: If I sell it, move it, or wreck it, I'll let you know. In the meantime, all the information that's in the system is precisely the same information that was in the system five years ago, so why am I confirming it every year when I can just as easily confirm it once every five years??? Oh, and get this: "Although a citizen has a constitutional right not to speak or meet with sworn law enforcement officers while under investigation, no constitutional right protects a person's motor vehicle registration with a state agency." And that helps us honest, law-abiding citizens just how, exactly?"

I agree with CCJ that insofar as it's administered in my state today, it is indeed a scam. It literally costs just over ten times more money to administer the problem than it does to keep up my CHP.

Finally, what the heck does it matter what the age and cost of my vehicle? Does a new vehicle put more wear and tear on the roads than an old one? What if I barely drive it, and why aren't taxes being taken at the pump rather than at the DMV?

Seriously, legislators, stop allowing the DMV to drive the rates. There is ZERO valid requirement for people to register their vehicle once a year. That's foolishness.

That is indeed a scam.
 

dmatting

Regular Member
Joined
May 25, 2011
Messages
442
Location
Durham, NC
This is typical of the keyboard commandos. Big claims and then when confronted to back up the claims, more unsubstantiated claims are made. All your posts will now be filtered through the lens of this thread. Credibility zero.

Charles
You are an intelligent fellow, let youtube and google and case law be your guide along with your own independent thinking, As I mentioned, my results
and other folks results may vary, IE, I have the time and finances to fight at the kangaroo court level, and beyond, others may not have such a luxury, I can articulate both in oral arguments and written briefs on my own, again, others may not have the same luxury..

Educating folks on their rights and than expecting folks to defend said rights in a court is like attempting to teach folks how to play poker at the highest level.. It simply cannot be taught.. Both require balls and playing by the seat of his/her pants.. While also putting ones liberty and finances in jeopardy.

Liberty and freedom can only be acquired thru individual sacrifice and due diligence, or by employing a team of liberty minded barristers.. However bear in mind that all attorney's pledge allegiance to the bar, aka the system.. I, on the hand, have only allegiance to myself and my posterity.

Again, please let me state, I do not ever do any business, with the federal, state or local government, I shall not, even out of fear, give said government jurisdiction over me or my property. I denounce any and all quasi laws that require licensing, permits or supervision by a government entity, that subjects a citizen to surrender" a right, for a government issued privilege".. I refuse to do business with any government agency.

Please be advised, my results and results of others may vary.

Be advised accordingly.

My .02
Regards
CCJ
 

Firearms Iinstuctor

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2011
Messages
3,277
Location
northern wis
In 33 years in law enforcement I heard and seen it all constitutional drivers license, plates no drivers license home made drivers license, home made constitutional plates.

Claims of the right to travel with both. been handed pages of reason why the driver didn't need a DL. while always claiming a constitutional right to travel and drive.

I never seen any one of these arguments prevail in court.

We had a big Posse Comitatus movement in Wisconsin for a while.

Are all these arguments invalid no are they all valid no. I am a constitutionalist in my political views but after seeing these people act they do some times have some strange ideas.

I would love to have CCJ post actual court documents or cases where some one has prevailed making these arguments and won.
 

bbMurphy

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 1, 2013
Messages
82
Location
Springfield, VA
Virginia Supreme Court Ruling

Here in Virginia the right to travel/drive and the requirement for a license or permit is explicitly defined in a Virginia Supreme Court case from 1930. Thompson vs. Smith.

Court ruling:

The right of a citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon in the ordinary course of life and business is a common right which he has under his right to enjoy life and liberty, to acquire and possess property, and to pursue happiness and safety. It includes the right in so doing to use the ordinary and usual conveyances of the day; and under the existing modes of travel includes the right to drive a horse-drawn carriage or wagon thereon, or to operate an automobile thereon, for the usual and ordinary purposes of life and business.

It is not a mere privilege, like the privilege of moving a house in the street, operating a business stand in the street, or transporting persons or property for hire along the street, which a city may permit or prohibit at will.

The exercise of such a common right the city may, under its police power, regulate in the interest of the public safety and welfare; but it may not arbitrarily or unreasonably prohibit or restrict it, nor may it permit one to exercise it and refuse to permit another of like qualifications, under like conditions and circumstances, to exercise it. (emphasis is mine).

Full text of case is here: https://casetext.com/case/thompson-v-smith-24

There has been no case since then that refutes this decision.
 
Last edited:

countryclubjoe

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
2,505
Location
nj
Here in Virginia the right to travel/drive and the requirement for a license or permit is explicitly defined in a Virginia Supreme Court case from 1930. Thompson vs. Smith.

Court ruling:

The right of a citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon in the ordinary course of life and business is a common right which he has under his right to enjoy life and liberty, to acquire and possess property, and to pursue happiness and safety. It includes the right in so doing to use the ordinary and usual conveyances of the day; and under the existing modes of travel includes the right to drive a horse-drawn carriage or wagon thereon, or to operate an automobile thereon, for the usual and ordinary purposes of life and business.

It is not a mere privilege, like the privilege of moving a house in the street, operating a business stand in the street, or transporting persons or property for hire along the street, which a city may permit or prohibit at will.

The exercise of such a common right the city may, under its police power, regulate in the interest of the public safety and welfare; but it may not arbitrarily or unreasonably prohibit or restrict it, nor may it permit one to exercise it and refuse to permit another of like qualifications, under like conditions and circumstances, to exercise it. (emphasis is mine).

Full text of case is here: https://casetext.com/case/thompson-v-smith-24

There has been no case since then that refutes this decision.
+1
I have posted this same case many times here. It seems people only read what they want to read.. I have also used said case in the kangaroo traffic court, each time, case was dismissed.. Also be advised, the powers to be, the people that make money off the scam, do not want other less knowledgable folks to know of this right.. They want people to be ignorant of their rights, and from some of the posters here, they are doing a great job of keeping the ignorant in the dark.

Thank you for the post, there are also other cases to support our claims. My .02

Regards
CCJ
 
Last edited:

countryclubjoe

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
2,505
Location
nj
In 33 years in law enforcement I heard and seen it all constitutional drivers license, plates no drivers license home made drivers license, home made constitutional plates.

Claims of the right to travel with both. been handed pages of reason why the driver didn't need a DL. while always claiming a constitutional right to travel and drive.

I never seen any one of these arguments prevail in court.

We had a big Posse Comitatus movement in Wisconsin for a while.

Are all these arguments invalid no are they all valid no. I am a constitutionalist in my political views but after seeing these people act they do some times have some strange ideas.

I would love to have CCJ post actual court documents or cases where some one has prevailed making these arguments and won.
The case gets dismissed at the kangaroo court level. Be advised, judges, lawyers, cops, dmv, etc, make tons of money, off people that blindly pay their fines, fees, etc.. They don't want this type information, cutting into their bottom line..

I have been stopped 2 times in 25 years, yes, i obey the rules of the highway, both times without the state issued DL.. When I receive the complaint, I file for discovery, I file a MTD, along with a well articulated brief, both times the cases were dismissed. Results may vary for others.

CCJ
 

JamesCanby

Activist Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2010
Messages
1,480
Location
Alexandria, VA at www.NoVA-MDSelfDefense.com
+1
I have posted this same case many times here. It seems people only read what they want to read.. I have also used said case in the kangaroo traffic court, each time, case was dismissed.. Also be advised, the powers to be, the people that make money off the scam, do not want other less knowledgable folks to know of this right.. They want people to be ignorant of their rights, and from some of the posters here, they are doing a great job of keeping the ignorant in the dark.

Thank you for the post, there are also other cases to support our claims. My .02

Regards
CCJ
And all some of us are asking is for you to provide the court documents, redacted as necessary to protect your *real* identity, that support your claim that you have successfully defended your right to drive an automobile without having obtained a driver's license from your state. That shouldn't be difficult, assuming they actually exist.
 
Top