Driving A Right, Not A Privilege


SPECIAL POLICE OFFICER BULLETIN
U.S. COURT DECISIONS CONFIRM "DRIVING A MOTOR VEHICLE" IS A
CITIZENS RIGHT AND NOT A GOVERNMENT GRANTED PRIVILEGE.

For many years Professionals within the criminal justice System have acted upon the belief that traveling by motor vehicle upon the roadway was a privilege that was gained by a citizen only after approval by their respective state government in the form of the issuance of a permit or license to that Particular individual. Legislators, police officers and court officials are becoming aware that there are now court decisions that prove the fallacy of the legal opinion that" driving is a privilege and therefore requires government approval, i.e. a license". Some of these cases are:

Case # 1 - "Even the legislature has no power to deny to a citizen the right to travel upon the highway and transport his property in the ordinary course of his business or pleasure, though this right may be regulated in accordance with the public interest and convenience. - Chicago Motor Coach v Chicago 169 NE 22
("Regulated" here means traffic safety enforcement, stop lights, signs, etc. NOT a privilege that requires permission i.e.- licensing, mandatory insurance, vehicle registration, etc.)

Case # 2 - "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 right which he has under the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."- Thompson v Smith 154 SE 579.

It could not be stated more conclusively that Citizens of the states have a right to travel, without approval or restriction, (license,) and that this right is protected under the U.S. Constitution. Here are other court
decisions that expound the same facts:

Case # 3 - "The right to travel is a part of the liberty of which the citizen cannot be deprived without due process of law under the 5th Amendment." - Kent v Dulles, 357 U.S. 116, 125.

Case # 4 - "Undoubtedly the right of locomotion, the right to remove from one place to another according to inclination, is an attribute of personal Liberty, and the right, ordinarily, of free transit from or through the
territory of any State is a right secured by the l4th Amendment and by other provisions of the Constitution." - Schactman v Dulles, 96 App D.C. 287, 293.

FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT

As hard as it is for those of us in Law enforcement to believe, there is no room for speculation in these court decisions. The American citizen does indeed have the inalienable right to use the roadways unrestricted in any manner as long as they are not damaging or violating property or rights of
another.

Government, in requiring the people to file for "drivers Licenses, vehicle registrations, mandatory insurance, and demanding they stop for vehicle inspections, DUI/DWI roadblocks etc. without question, are "restricting", and therefore violating, the Peoples common law right to travel.

Is this a new legal interpretation on this subject of the right to travel? Apparently not. The American Citizens and Lawmen Association in conjunction with The U.S. Federal Law Research Center are presently involved in studies in several areas involving questions on constitutional law. One of the many areas under review is the area of "Citizens right to travel." In an interview a spokesmen stated: "Upon researching this subject over many months, substantial case law has presented itself that completely substantiates the position that the "right to travel unrestricted upon the nations highways" is and has always been a fundamental right of every Citizen."

This means that the "beliefs and opinions" our state legislators, the courts, and those of as involved in the law enforcement profession have acted upon for years have been in error. Researchers armed with actual facts state that U.S. case law is overwhelming in determining that - to restrict, in any fashion, the movement of the individual American in the free exercise of their right to travel upon the roadways, (excluding "commerce" which the state Legislatures are correct in regulating), is a serious breach of those
freedoms secured by the U.S. Constitution, and most state Constitutions, i.e - it is Unlawful.

THE REVELATION THAT THE AMERICAN CITIZEN HAS ALWAYS HAD THE INALIENABLE RIGHT TO TRAVEL RAISES PROFOUND QUESTIONS TO THOSE WHO ARE INVOLVED IN MAKING AND ENFORCING STATE LAWS.

The first of such questions may very well be - If the States have been enforcing laws that are unconstitutional on their face, it would seem that there must be some way that a state can legally put restrictions, such as - licensing requirements, mandatory insurance, vehicle registration, vehicle
inspections, D.W.I. roadblocks, to name just a few, on a Citizens constitutionally protected right. Is that not so?

For the answer to this question let us look, once again, to the U.S. courts for a determination on this very issue.

The case of Hertado v. California, 110 U.S. 516. states very plainly: "The State cannot diminish rights of the people."

"the assertion of federal rights, when plainly and reasonably made, is not to be defeated under the name of local practice."- Davis v. Wechsler, 263 U.S. 22, 24.

Would we not say that these judicial decisions are straight to the point - that there is no lawful method for government to put restrictions or Limitations on rights belonging to the people?

Other cases are even more straight forward:

"Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them." - Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 491.

"The claim and exercise of a constitutional right cannot be converted into a crime.· - Miller v. U.S., 230 F 2d 486, 489.

"There can be no sanction or penalty imposed upon one because of this exercise of Constitutional rights."- Sherar v. Cullen, 481 F. 945. ( There is no question that a citation/ticket issued by a police officer, for no drivers license, no current vehicle registration, no vehicle insurance etc. which carries a fine or jail time, is a penalty or sanction, and is indeed "converting a Right into a crime".)

We could go on, quoting court decision after court decision, however, In addition, the Constitution itself answers our question- "Can a government legally put restrictions on the rights of the American people at anytime, for any reason"? (Such as in this particular case - when the government believes it to be for the safety and welfare of the people).

The answer is found in ARTICLE SIX of the U.S. Constitution:

"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof;.shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary not withstanding". (This tells us that the U.S.
Constitution is to be upheld over any state, county, or city Laws that are in opposition to it.)

In the same Article it goes on to say just who it is within our governments that is bound by this Supreme Law:

"The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution;". - ART. 6 U.S. CONST.

We know that Police officers, are a part of the Executive branch. We are "Executive Officers".

Article 6 above, is called the SUPREMACY CLAUSE, and it clearly states that, under every circumstance, the above listed officials in these United States must hold this documents tenets supreme over any other laws, regulations, or orders. Every U.S. Police officer knows that they have sworn a oath to the people of our nation that we will not only protect their lives and property, but, that we will uphold, and protect their freedoms and rights under the Supreme laws of this nation, - the U. S. Constitution.

In this regard then, we must agree that those within government that restrict a Citizens rights, (such as restricting the peoples right to travel,) are acting in violation of his or her oath of office and are actually committing a crime against such Citizens. Here's an interesting question. Is ignorance of these laws an excuse for such acts by officials? If we are to follow the "letter of the law (as we are sworn to do), this
places officials that involve themselves in such unlawful acts in an unfavorable legal situation. For it is a felony and federal crime to violate, or deprive citizens of their constitutionally protected rights.

Our system of law dictates the fact that there are only two ways to legally remove a right belonging to the people. These are - #1 - by lawfully amending the constitution, or #2 - by a person knowingly waiving a
particular right.

Some of the confusion in our present system has arisen because many millions of people have waived their right to travel "unrestricted" upon the roadways of the states and opted into the jurisdiction of the state for various reasons. Those who have knowingly given up these rights are now legally regulated by state law, the proper courts, and "sworn, constitutionally empowered officers-of-the-law," and must acquire proper permits, registrations, insurance, etc.

There are basically two groups of people in this category:

#1 - Any citizen that involves themselves in "commerce," (business for private gain), upon the highways of the state.

Here is what the courts have said about this:

"...For while a citizen has the right to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, that right does not extend to the use of the highways, either in whole or in part, as a place for private gain. For the latter purpose no person has a vested right to use the highways of the state, but is a privilege or license which the legislature may grant or withhold at its discretion..." - State v Johnson, 243 P. 1073, 1078.

Other U.S. court cases that confirm and point out the difference between the "right" of the citizen to travel and a government "privilege" are - Barney v Board of Railroad Commissioners; State v City of Spokane, 186 P. 864.; Ex Parte Dickey (Dickey v Davis), 85 S.E. 781.; Teche Lines v Danforth, 12
So.2d 784.

There are numerous other court decisions that spell out the JURISDICTION issue in these two distinctly different activities. However, because of space restrictions we will leave it up to officers to research it further for themselves. (See last page for additional references).

#2 - The second group of citizens that are legally under the jurisdiction of the state is the individual citizen who has voluntarily and knowingly waived their right to travel "unregulated and unrestricted" by requesting placement under such jurisdiction through the acquisition of a state - drivers license, vehicle registration, mandatory insurance, etc. (In other words "by contract only".)

We should remember what makes this "legal," and not a violation of the individual's common law right to travel "unrestricted" is that they knowingly volunteer, freely, by contract, to waive their right. If they were
forced, coerced or unknowingly placed under the States powers, the courts have said it is a clear violation of their rights.

This in itself raises a very interesting question. What percentage of the people in each state have filed, and received, licenses, registrations, insurance etc. after erroneously being advised by their government that it
was mandatory?

Many of our courts, attorneys and police officials are just becoming informed about this important issue and the difference between "Privileges vs. Rights". We can assume that the majority of those Americans carrying state licenses, vehicle registrations etc., have no knowledge of the rights they waived in obeying laws such as these that the U.S. Constitution clearly states are unlawful, i.e. "laws of no effect". In other words - "LAWS THAT ARE NOT LAWS AT ALL."

OUR SWORN DUTY

An area of serious consideration for every police officer, is to understand that the most important law in our land he has taken an oath to protect, defend, AND ENFORCE, is not state laws, nor city or county ordinances, but, that law that supercede all other laws in our nation, - the U.S. Constitution. If laws in a particular police officer's state, or local community are in conflict with the SUPREME LAW of our nation, there Is no question that the officer's duty is to "uphold the U.S. Constitution."

What does this mean to the "patrol officer" who will be the only sworn "Executive Officer" on the scene, when knowledgeable Citizens raise serious objections over possession of insurance, drivers licenses and other restrictions? It definitely means these officers will be faced with a hard decision. (Most certainly if that decision affects state, city or county revenues, such as the issuing of citations do.)

Example: If a state legislator, judge or a superior tells a police officer to proceed and enforce a contradictory, (illegal), state law rather than the Supreme Law of this country, what is that "sworn officer" to do? Although we may not want to hear it, there is but one right answer, - "the officer is duty bound to uphold his oath of office" and obey the highest laws of the nation. THIS IS OUR SWORN DUTY AND IT'S THE LAW!

Such a strong honest stand taken by a police officer, upholding his or her oath of office, takes moral strength of character. It will, without question, "SEPARATE THE MEN FROM THE BOYS." Such honest and straight forward decisions on behalf of a government official have often caused pressure to
be applied to force such officers to set aside, or compromise their morals or convictions.

As a solace for those brave souls in uniform that will stand up for law and justice, even when it's unpopular, or uncomfortable to do so...let me say this. In any legal stand-off over a sworn official "violating" or "upholding" their oath of office, those that would side with the "violation" should inevitable lose.

Our Founding Fathers assured us, on many occasions, the following: Defending our freedoms in the face of people that would for "expedients sake," or behind the guise, "for the safety and welfare of the masses," ignore people's rights, would forever demand sacrifice and vigilance from those that desired to remain free. That sounds a little like - "Freedom is not free!"

Every police officer should keep the following U.S. court ruling, that was covered earlier, in mind before issuing citations in regard to "mandatory licensing, registration and insurance" - verses - "the right of the people to travel unencumbered":

"THE CLAlM AND EXERCISE OF A CONSTITUTIONAL RlGHT CANNOT BE CONVERTED INTO A CRIME." - Miller v U.S., 230 F 2d 486. 489.

And as we have seen, "traveling freely," going about ones daily activities, is the exercise of a most basic right.

Aid&Abet Newsletter Mon, 03 Feb 2003 14:09:19 -0600
P.O.BOX 8787, PHOENIX, ARIZONA 85066

Sign up for PayPal and start accepting credit card payments instantly.

This is a crazy world. What can be done? Amazingly, we have been mislead. We have been taught that we can control government by voting. The founder of the Rothschild dynasty, Mayer Amschel Bauer, told the secret of controlling the government of a nation over 200 years ago. He said, "Permit me to issue and control the money of a nation and I care not who makes its laws." Get the picture? Your freedom hinges first on the nation's banks and money system. Freedom is connected with Debt Elimination for each individual. Not only does this end personal debt, it places the people first in line as creditors to the National Debt ahead of the banks. They don't wish for you to know this. It has to do with recognizing WHO you really are in A New Beginning: A Practical Course in Miracles, an informational study.

Disclaimer - The posting of stories, commentaries, reports, documents and links (embedded or otherwise) on this site does not in any way, shape or form, implied or otherwise, necessarily express or suggest endorsement or support of any of such posted material or parts therein.

The myriad of facts, conjecture, perspectives, viewpoints, opinions, analyses, and information in the articles, stories and commentaries posted on this site range from cutting edge hard news and comment to extreme and unusual perspectives. We choose not to sweep uncomfortable material under the rug - where it can grow and fester. We choose not to censor skewed logic and uncomfortable rhetoric. These things reflect the world as it now is - for better and worse. We present multiple facts, perspectives, viewpoints, opinions, analyses, and information.

Journalism is (or used to be) the profession of gathering and presenting a broad panorama of news about the events of our times and presenting it to readers for their own consideration. We believe in the intelligence, judgment and wisdom of our readers to discern for themselves among the data which appears on this site that which is valid and worthy...or otherwise. See full legal disclaimer

I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it. (attributed to Voltaire), but certainly embodies what the 1st amendment of the constitution refers to as the freedom of speech

American Gold and Silver Currency is Back. Click here for the Liberty Dollar at a Discount.

Bill of Rights

Amendment 1

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

 


 






detnal discount program

Is the high cost of quality supplemental health care getting you down? Are you one of 7 out of 10 Americans with no Dental saving program? Look no further...it is now possible to access affordable dental, vision, prescription and chiropractic programs for your entire household*. MORE

* DISCLOSURE - This is not insurance. The Plan provides discounts at certain healthcare providers for medical services. The Plan member is obligated to pay for all healthcare services but will recieve a discount from those healthcare services who have contracted with the Discount Medical Plan.


illum image
The Illuminati have nearly completed their agenda and this is the Final Warning: The History of the New World Order by David Allen Rivera
See also Child Sexual Abuse
  

What are stem cell enhancers? lessons in stem cells
There is now an all natural, plant based extract, patented in 2004, and identified as a stem cell enhancer. The patent states that this natural botanical and its extracts support the release of adult stem cells from the bone marrow and into the bloodstream where they can then circulate throughout the body, helping to maintain the body's own Natural Healing System

Kay, owner and webmaster

 

To contact the webmaster
please click on the dragonfly.



Tunguska Blast Banner  

 

Queen Victoria is back and she is amused!  This time she's not taking HeRself  ....or anything... seriously.  HerStory Cont.

The most effective CANDIDA DEFENSE product available. This proprietary formula is teeming with live bacteria that start to work right away to help rid the body of tough Candida organisms.
email us or visit this site: ghtdirect.com/KARA

PUT YOUR BANNER OR ADVERTISEMENT HERE.

WE HAVE up to 6,000 VISITORS A DAY!
CONTACT US FOR PRICES

 

 

     
 

 

 
Debt Elimination
Accelerated Mortgage Payoff
Facing Foreclosure
Eliminate Credit Card Debt
Eliminate Student Loans
Eliminate Tax Liens and
tax help

UCC1
Credit Repair
Draft Freedom
Family Protection
Family Charitable Foundation

should all candidates for office be required to pass 6th grade tests and have physicals, which would be reported to the public?
No, I just want to trust they are smart and well
yes, we have a right to know
yes, and they should not be allowed to run for office unless the pass all these tests
yes, and those tests shoud include psychiatric exams
  
pollcode.com free polls
Join The Energy Revolution-Days 

 

Sheeple Analyst Talk

911, Conspiracy and Illuminati
Bush Liars' Club
Choosing Evil
Conned by the Neocons
Defending the Indefensible
Do-Si-Do Takes Two to Tango
Fall of the WTC
Holocaust History
Laura Demos Stepford Lying
Outsourcing America
Partisan Politics, Propaganda
Peace through Strength Lies
Religion, Rights, Civility and NWO
Righteous Joe from WND
Role of Force in Libya
Roving Curveballs on Clarke
Shining a Light on the Illuminati
The Haters
The Tutti-Fruiti Express
WMD Lies
Zionism vs Jews



9/11: Malfeasance or Treason
9-11, Satanic Power of the NWO
911: The Road To Tyranny
Africa
America's Empire of Bases
How US Schools Create Sheeple
Iraq, Afghanistan: Illegal Wars
Israel and Zionism
Latin America
Nick Berg and 9-11
Peak Oil-Myth or Reality
Seventh Fire News Archives
Skull and Bones
The Lies of the Past
Unbridgeable Chasm of Doubt
US Debt Clock
Weapons of Mass Destruction
Who Died and Who Lied
Why Do They Hate Us?





9-11 and the Mossad
Abu Nidal- Mossad Terrorist
False Flag Attack on the USS Liberty
Israel's Deliberate Attack on the U.S.S. Liberty
Zionism as Jewish National Socialism
Mossad Deception and Murder  Mossad tricks US Attack on Libya
Mossad Uses Islamists
Most Treacherous Jew
Murder of Robert Maxwell
Marines Not Warned by Mossad
D id Six Million Really Die?
Hamas Is a Creation of Mossad
Hamas history tied to Israel
Israeli Roots of Hamas Exposed
Hamas Gang Is Tool of Sharon
Zionist-Israeli Roots of Hamas
The Israeli Spy Ring
Israeli Mega Spies
Turning over Stones Finds Mossad
Zionist Connection to 9-11
Protocols of the Elders of Zion
Mind Control (Audios)
Battle for Your Mind
New World Order
Freedman on Zionism
Myron Fagan's Expose'
Secret order of the Illuminati
Silent weapons for quiet wars
Egyptian-Masonic-Satanic Connection
Freemasonry - Mystery Religions
Crowley, 33° Mason, Human Sacrifice
Egyptian Mystery and Masonic Lodge
Satanic Ritual Abuse


We are a nationwide association dedicated to providing honest legal advice, counsel and reform in every state.  OUTLAWS LEGAL SERVICE provides information about the true nature of the law to everyone that seeks to educate and free themselves from the abuse and corruption that is rampant in the courts and slowly destroying America.


Did FEMA know 9-11 attacks were ahead when this was published in 2000?


Survivor  In 1942 a US Navy destroyer was shipwrecked off Newfoundland. Of the few who survived, one man, Lanier Phillips, was black. The rescuers, never having seen a black man before, tried to scrub his skin clean and white. This is a story about growing up with fear in segregated Georgia, enlisting in a segregated navy, facing death in the icy North Atlantic, and a rescue which galvanized a man to fight racial discrimination.  Listen to Survivor with Real Player


Remembering Kent State 1970  When thirteen students were shot by Ohio National Guard Troops during a war demonstration on the Kent State University Campus on the first week of May 1970, four young lives were ended and a nation was stunned. More than 30 years later, the world at war is a different place. However, those thirteen seconds in May, 1970 still remain scorched into an Ohio hillside. Through archival tape and interviews, Remembering Kent State tracks the events that led up to the shootings.  Listen to Remembering Kent State 1970 with Real Player


War Comes to Twin Peaks explores the rumblings of protest at home during the 1991 Persian Gulf War. From a priest who takes up the anti-war protests, disillusioned war veterans, and a mother who fears for her son as he departs for service, War Comes to Twin Peaks shows us the varied human faces affected by administration policy. Their stories strike a familiar chord as the United States again confronts the possibility of war with Iraq more than a decade later  Listen to War Comes to Twin Peaks with Real Player


  Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports Exposed  RealVideo (streaming) :: (37:01) The Biggest Game in Town exposes the two-tiered accounting of all federal, state, county governments. Find out how the issue is confused by focusing on the budget and not discussing the investments. There is no reason for continued taxation.


  Aldous Huxley: The Ultimate Revolution, March 20, 1962 
RealAudio (streaming)  A recorded lecture (UC Berkeley 1962), of Aldous Huxley Brave New World on the subject of "The Ultimate Revolution." He talks about using terrorism to create willing slaves out of the population.



Audios About 911

To Listen to Meria Heller
Archived Interviews - Click Here

Kyle Hence of UnansweredQuestions

 Nafeez Adhmed "War on Freedom"

Mike Vreeland

Mark Elsis Interview on Questioning September 11th

Mark Elsis Interview on NORAD's Press Release

Jeff Rense: Michael C. Ruppert and Mike Vreeland Interview

Jeff Rense: Kristina Borjesson Interview
"Myth of a Free Press" (start at 1:00)

Edward Said on Terrorism

Noam Chomsky: Afghanistan / Terrorism


Play Biowarfare: Looking in the Mirror (58:00)