Jump to content


Photo

Drivers licensing vs. Right to travel


  • Please log in to reply
20 replies to this topic

#1 symphonyjones83

symphonyjones83

    New Member

  • Members
  • 6 posts

Posted 13 December 2009 - 04:57 AM

Is it a lawfully necessary to have to obtain a state issued drivers license in order to travel in an automobile? As I understand it, a license is a permit, granted by a governmental body, to a person, firm, or corporation to pursue some occupation, or to carry on some business which is subject to regulation under the police power. And that would mean that the state has committed massive fraud by giving no notice to any natural person who attempts to obtain a license that taking on the restrictions of a driver's license means to willfully surrender certain inalienable rights.


#2 LegalwriterOne

LegalwriterOne

    Platinum Contributor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,604 posts

Posted 13 December 2009 - 06:23 AM

A right to travel means you are free to go where you want.  It does not mean you have a right to travel by driving a car if you are not properly licensed by your state of residence.  There is no "right" to drive a vehicle.  It is a privilege granted by the state upon proof the person meets the requirements as set forth in state statutes.

#3 symphonyjones83

symphonyjones83

    New Member

  • Members
  • 6 posts

Posted 13 December 2009 - 08:21 AM

Well, i was told that traveling in an automobile, and driving a motor vehicle are not the same thing according to Black's Law Dictionary. And many people have beaten cases because a driver's license is necessary only for commercial purposes. Once you sign the application for the driver's license, and have your signature put on the license itself, you are taking on the restrictions of said license,thereby, willfully surrendering your natural, Constitutional rights. Municipalities are corporations, and anyone not bound contractually in any way by such municipalities, are not subject to its jurisdiction.


#4 Badge203

Badge203

    Platinum Contributor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,025 posts

Posted 13 December 2009 - 12:47 PM

This is a plain and simple answer in two parts


#1) You do not have to have a drivers license to ride in a vehicle


#2) You do have to have a drivers license to drive a car


Nothing else needs to be said about this. It is the law in EVERY state. Drive without a drivers license and you get a ticket, continue to do it you go to jail.


Once you get to court you can try to explain what you think you know to the judge, where he or she will find you guilty of operating a motor vehicle without a license, you will pay a fine or go to jail or both


This is not a case of what you think you know, or what somebody else thinks he or she knows, or what you want to read into whatever it is you are reading.



#5 symphonyjones83

symphonyjones83

    New Member

  • Members
  • 6 posts

Posted 13 December 2009 - 01:00 PM

Again, here being brought up are the terms "driving" and "motor vehicle." Both are terms that describe commercial use of public highways. I am not using the roads for profit, and if the attempt is trying to be made to MAKE ME obtain a driver's license....JAIL, holding cells, or temporary detention will not scare me into giving up my right, or challenging the jurisdiction of police power, or any magistrate. And no fine can be levied against me without due process, this I am for sure. I see that this site is administrated by people who are slanted toward corporate interest.

Thank you anyway, but I will not be fooled.


#6 symphonyjones83

symphonyjones83

    New Member

  • Members
  • 6 posts

Posted 13 December 2009 - 01:01 PM

Are you a cop Badge203?


#7 Tax_Counsel

Tax_Counsel

    Platinum Contributor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,444 posts

Posted 13 December 2009 - 07:57 PM

I've seen folks from, for lack of a better phrase, the anti-government crowd, make this kind of argument in court. They all lost because there is no legal support for that position. States can, and do, impose a requirement that you must have a valid driver's license to drive, operate, use any vehicle, car, auto — whatever term you want to use — on the roads of that that state. Your efforts at word games to limit the requirement of a license to commercial activity won't win over the court. I don't expect to convince you, the folks that tend to believe this stuff also tend not to listen to what others say that conflicts with their beliefs. You can try making that argument should you ever be cited for driving without a license and see how far it gets you. Just come prepared to pay the consequences should the court reject your argument.


#8 freeborn

freeborn

    New Member

  • Members
  • 2 posts

Posted 25 June 2013 - 02:22 PM

an argument is only a a way to seek a legal determination and rule on it,but all determinations are based on someones opinion,the constitution and the bill of rights say that any decision made shall be made in my favor so if i believe you are violating my right to travel, you are..So i added to your argument prove me wrong



#9 adjusterjack

adjusterjack

    Platinum Contributor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,490 posts

Posted 25 June 2013 - 02:49 PM

This argument is similar to the argument of the lunatic fringe that the US Income Tax is voluntary and doesn't have to be paid.

 

Tax_counsel will be happy to fill you on how well that argument goes over in court.


Warning: Legal issues are complicated. Explanations and comments here are simplified and might not fully explain the ramifications of your particular issue. I am not a lawyer. I do not give legal advice. I make comments based on my knowledge and experience. I guarantee nothing. If you act on my comments without the advice of an attorney, you do so at your own risk.


#10 Tax_Counsel

Tax_Counsel

    Platinum Contributor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,444 posts

Posted 25 June 2013 - 08:22 PM

the constitution and the bill of rights say that any decision made shall be made in my favor

 

Exactly where in the Constitution does it say that the courts absolutely must find in your favor no matter what? I've read the Constitution (and the Bill of Rights are a part of the Constitution) from start to end and do not see where it says that "the Courts must always rule in ________ favor." (Insert your real name in the blank.) 

 

 

 

so if i believe you are violating my right to travel, you are.

 

I'll be blunt. Your argument here that you’re right just because you say you are is the most inane argument I've heard in a long time. It certainly won’t work in court. I'm sure you’d like world that revolves around however you think the world should be — most of us would — but that’s not the way things really work.

 

If you had in mind some argument other than simply that you are right because you say you are, you’ll need to state it better.



#11 pg1067

pg1067

    Platinum Contributor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 45,393 posts

Posted 26 June 2013 - 06:33 AM

an argument is only a a way to seek a legal determination and rule on it,but all determinations are based on someones opinion,the constitution and the bill of rights say that any decision made shall be made in my favor so if i believe you are violating my right to travel, you are..So i added to your argument prove me wrong

 

Any good reason why you chose to resurrect a three and a half year old thread?



#12 southpole6

southpole6

    New Member

  • Members
  • 1 posts

Posted 21 September 2013 - 05:54 PM

I am well aware that I might receive flack from those that don't understand the truth of the matter but neverthless here goes..so as to not pick and choose does the constitution not support certain rights?  In the constitution it states that it is the supreme law of the land. Most people conform because they dont want to deal with the headache that standing up for ones' rights entails.  I get it and for the most part I play that game as well.  Does that mean I agree with those supporters of State law over the constitution no.  Regardless on what is being said as a result of this  there is something that we all have to agree on.  At some point there will be no further speculation on who is right about state law vs the constitution.   If you believe the ones in power make the entirety of regulations for our benefit will be affected the same as those who do not.



#13 adjusterjack

adjusterjack

    Platinum Contributor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,490 posts

Posted 22 September 2013 - 07:14 AM

DNFTT.


Warning: Legal issues are complicated. Explanations and comments here are simplified and might not fully explain the ramifications of your particular issue. I am not a lawyer. I do not give legal advice. I make comments based on my knowledge and experience. I guarantee nothing. If you act on my comments without the advice of an attorney, you do so at your own risk.


#14 BOR_BOR

BOR_BOR

    Bronze Contributor

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 251 posts

Posted 23 September 2013 - 05:47 AM

I have this case in my head, from Hendrick v. Maryland (1915), US SC.

 

The movement of motor vehicles over highways, being attended by constant and serious dangers to the public and also being abnormally destructive to the highways, is a proper subject of police regulation by the state.

 

In the absence of national legislation covering the subject, a state may prescribe uniform regulations necessary for safety and order in respect to operation of motor vehicles on its highways, including those moving in interstate commerce.



#15 pg1067

pg1067

    Platinum Contributor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 45,393 posts

Posted 23 September 2013 - 08:08 AM

does the constitution not support certain rights?

 

Not quite sure what you're asking since you phrased this question in the negative, but the U.S. Constitution did create and does guarantee various rights.

 

Is this question really the reason you chose to resurrect a nearly four year old thread that was previously resurrected for no apparent reason three months ago?



#16 Const.Worker39

Const.Worker39

    New Member

  • Members
  • 1 posts

Posted 15 January 2014 - 08:45 PM

I have been keeping an eye on topics about the drivers license for many years now!

 

 

has anyone seen this video?  or go to you tube and look up Charlie sprinkle.

 

He brings up some interesting points about police and judges miss-using their authority!

 

A License can only be obtained for something that is already legal (or a right) IE...fishing license, hunting license, etc...

 

so to me it seems only as way to collect revenue!  i can't get a kill your stupid neighbor license!

because killing IS ILLEGAL!

 

just for a sticking point! one could have his license suspended years ago but did not want to pay the outrageous reinstatement fee's so he goes with out!

so one then wins the lottery, and with no drivers license they can go buy a jet and get a pilots certificate!

so.... behind which wheel would one be more dangerous?

35 MPH 12 blocks to the store    or 600+MPH above your house and schools??????

 

there just seems to be no logic in our justice system  only the all mighty dollar!

 

by the way the state of Georgia introduced a bill (house bill 308 I think) to get rid of drivers license's 

 

 



#17 pg1067

pg1067

    Platinum Contributor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 45,393 posts

Posted 16 January 2014 - 11:23 AM



has anyone seen this video? 

 

While I can't presently access it, I'm sure many people have seen it.  If it's on YouTube, then there should be a viewer count, so I'm not sure why you'd need to ask this question (esp. not here).

 

 

 



A License can only be obtained for something that is already legal (or a right) IE...fishing license, hunting license, etc...

 

so to me it seems only as way to collect revenue!  i can't get a kill your stupid neighbor license!

because killing IS ILLEGAL! 

 

Well...I agree with you about a "kill your stupid neighbor license" (although it's quite an intriguing concept), but I'm not really sure what your point is.  Note also that things like fishing, hunting, and driving are, in fact, illegal without a license (as to fishing and hunting, maybe there are places where a license isn't required, but that's not the case for driving).

 

 

 



by the way the state of Georgia introduced a bill (house bill 308 I think) to get rid of drivers license's 

 

The "[S]tate of Georgia" did no such thing.  Perhaps you're not familiar with how the legislative process works, in which case I would suggest that you visit YouTube and search for "schoolhouse rock i'm just a bill."  While it deals with federal legislation, the process is roughly the same in most states, including Georgia.

 

Anyway, in November 2010, Bobby Franklin, a former (now deceased) member of the Georgia House of Representatives "prefiled" a bill (HB 7) which, if passed, would have eliminated the driver's license requirement in Georgia.  Not surprisingly, the bill died without even going into committee.  Mr. Franklin's other brilliant ideas (none of which obviously ever were passed into law) included a bill that would have required all state transactions, including the payment of taxes, to be conducted in either gold or silver, a bill requiring a woman who suffered a miscarriage to prove that it occurred naturally or face felony prosecution, and a bill that would have purported to tax the Federal Reserve Bank in Atlanta.  That Mr. Franklin served in the Legislature for 14 years before his death is a rather damning indictment of the (lack of) intelligence and/or apathy of his constituents.



#18 explorer13

explorer13

    Bronze Contributor

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 443 posts

Posted 17 January 2014 - 03:23 AM

This response is not intended to create an attorney-client 

relationship.

 

A driver's license (or government issued picture ID) serves many

other functions such as boarding a commercial plane, cashing 

a check, being allowed to vote on election day in some states,

being allowed to purchase alcoholic beverages at a retail

liquor store, opening a bank account, among other acts 

that we all do in our daily lives..

 

The original poster will think whatever he wants to, regardless

of what knowledgeable people tell him/her. At some point in

time he/she will figure out that not having at least a government

issued state picture ID/driver's license, bears a significant

inconvenience factor to him/her.  



#19 deacon_law_1969

deacon_law_1969

    Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 99 posts

Posted 17 January 2014 - 08:29 AM

However a driver's license is only necessary in regards to driving (and possibly car insurance and other things peripheral to driving).  Every state can issue a state ID which serves every other identification function besides those required for driving.  And in some because of the laws being installed requiring identification to vote, those identifications are offered at nominal costs.  In other states the state ID is much cheaper to get than a drivers license.



#20 Fallen

Fallen

    Platinum Contributor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 59,686 posts

Posted 28 January 2014 - 02:42 PM

It'd be better, Constr(uction?) Worker, if you'd post a new question/start a new thread and perhaps include a link to this thread instead of opening up a years' old thread.  Not sure why anyone would entertain the topic given your only (non-legal) question about whether anyone's seen a given video.


I'll echo PG's advisory "warning" with a twist: (Many) legal issues are complicated. Explanations and comments here might not fully identify or explain the ramifications of your particular problem. I do not give legal advice as such (and such is impermissible here at any rate). Comments are based on personal knowledge and experience and legal info gleaned over a quarter century, and every state has differing laws on and avenues to address most topics.  If you need legal advice, you need to consult (and pay) a professional so that you may have someone to hold accountable.  Acting on personal and informational advice from a stranger on the internet is a bad idea -- at least not without your own thorough due dilience/research and confirmation as it applies to your situation.  :)





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users