Well done! Now to tell the lawyers that we dont need them anymore and to go get a job flipping burgers. Their are more lawyers in law school right now than their are lawyers in all america. They want work so they keep passing laws to arrest people. Thats why this guy says this doesnt work. It shows it does b/c the constitution says you have a right to travel. Plates and licenses and registrations are only for commerce. Start suing lawers and cops! Get our rights back!!
ok he said they can regulate but not prohibit. I don't see a difference between the two. Because you are prohibiting travel by making them get something in order to do it. Hell you can't even walk up Interstates through your state. They arrest you or if they are "nice" they drive you to BFE and drop you. I am all for safety..I am for responsibility. I am not for being told what to do if I am not endangering anyone but myself. Our government is an overprotective grandma...that you don't visit.
That lawyer is a fucking LIAR! The state can regulates "drivers", it's not the same thing as being a "traveler". Mode of travel is INCONSEQUENTIAL! That bastard is money hungry, he may as well be a Ferengi, he cares NOTHING for the rights of the citizens.
Lol that attorney cracks me up. The State government can only regulate drivers not travelers. This case does set precedence for other courts. Has this guy not heard of common law? Common law is past cases that have set precedence for current cases. I currently use 212 cases to prove the right to travel. I have beat 21 tickets using 97 of them. Right now I am on my 23rd case and know that I have already won. lol Evidently anyone can graduate law school.
@SiRTim1000 THANK YOU! It's nice to see others that understand the World criminal banker scam for what it is. Trying to convert our rights into privileges that you MUST pay for, they, & their cronies all get a cut of the extortion pie they've grown so fond of over the years.
Just a question that immediately came to my mind after hearing the lawyer. Is not driving on a road, a way to regulate travel?. Seriously, you dont see folks driving willy nilly anywhere they choose. If you think of regulation in terms of a system that actually seeks to protect life, and property...a road is regulating. IN that same way it seems that rules of the road would only apply if you there is damage to life and property. Those rules then only being a tool for the damaged party.
"person" is required by statute to have a drivers license, BUT We the People have a right to travel on public roads. If you can read this you are NOT a "person". A "person" is a corporation, trust, etc. Pursuant to 28 sec. 3002 (10) of the U. S. Code Annotated. They act on your state created trust account named YOUR NAME in all capital letters, (like corporations.) File a Notice of Understanding and Intent, Claim of Right(s), and Fee Schedule and get your proper political status back.
When it comes to DRIVING the law is clear but it's also clear when it comes to TRAVELLING as well.DRIVING is a commercial venture and travelling is a private one which requires no registering or lincensing.
That lawyer is a LIAR, LIcenses, Registrations , are for Drivers of Motor vehicles, not someone traveling in an automobile. As more and more people challenge this violation things will improve. Our kids kids will thank us for it.
@videocommenter67 You are welcome. There's no direct charge, but it would be nice if everyone who used them chipped-in a small amount just to make sure they stay well-maintained. Apart from that.....enjoy.
@wesmatron Yeah that is what I'm going to do for Sallie Mae. I have a letter that will make them put up or shut up.....lol It asks for a Bona Fide Proof of Claim.
@videocommenter67 Try calling them and asking:are you licensed to collect debt in this state (and have verfiy it in writing). They need to send you a debt validation letter proving you owe the debt. Ask them if they legally purchased the debt from the original creditor. What interest/fees have been tacked on-check state laws. I called a debt collector attorney and they told me they would not be pursuing my debt any further lol. File a cease and desist letter and they have to stop bothering you.
The procesutor has already commited FRAUD UPON THE COURT as soon as the Trial begins because he/she is required to pay the filing fees with the clerk. The State (NC) requires that the plaintiff (State) pays the filing fees...otherwise a trial can't take place.
The fed. rules of civil proceedures lists only one type of action...a "CIVIL ACTION" there is no such thing as a criminal action...IT IS ALL CIVIL. If it is civil, then who is making a claim? Who is the injured/damaged party?
"An Insurance policy is a maritime contract and therefore of admiralty jurisdiction". Delovio v. Boit
An "Operator" is defined under USC Title 49 Sec. 31301 as an EMPLOYEE!
An Officer can not give anybody a citation, summons anyone into a court room or even act upon probable cause because those are judicial determinations and the officer is not sworn in as a judicial officer...he only has executive powers...NO JUDICIAL POWERS AT ALL!!!
I find it interesting that the attorney featured denies the practice of precendent (which is practiced so often in so many cases) when he claims that this case has no bearing on future cases.
guess what , fools...the constitution doesnt give you any rights...the constitution is the rulebook that the people gave the federal government, which has long since been ignored... now your frankenstein creation has ruled us for over 200 years with the gun..if you think we are free, while this government throws us in prison and murders people that disobey it, youre a mindless idiot
This scum bag lawyer talks just like the police bosses who tell you that you should not believe anything is wrong when you see a video of a cop beating someone who is under their control. This guy will most probably burn in hell should he not reform his ways.
That so call lawyer is a LIAR. He knows it, He work for the Establishment. The Bar Association. You dont need a Contract to drive aka license, or registration. all this is BS. you need know your RIGHTs.
The lawyer may be correct, but the fact of the matter is, there is a certain circumstance which allowed this guy to avoid the taxman, and all that need be done is make sure this circumstance remains.
No surprise then that he does not elaborate about what exactly that circumstance is eh?
man not charging the cop looks as if cops are above the law while people go to prison for selling weed or weed seeds ohhh the irony cops beat teens=OKAY civilian sells weed=PRISON I think we need to take a deep look at the judical system as a hole and fire all them cops that have a history of violence and or 15 mins of angry i never got my job back and i dump a kid out of his chair I was fired quick the cop beats the teen and gets hired back too a police force no no no
the lawyer is full of shit,his loyalty is to the BAR British Accredition Register,not to you. None but you can claim your rights and if you don't know what they are you don't have any.Lawyers do not know law,they know procedure only. We still have the Constitution a Common Law Trust doc ,learn it ,apply it and be really free! The right to travel freely and unencombered is a long held Constitutionally protected right,I have no license as I do not drive,I travel..
Most cops are good except for the majority of them--the blood-thirsty maniacs. All that the good cops can do is to bear witness to the bad cops who routinely punch, kick, tase and pummel handcuffed citizens.
what else one can expect from an advocate(Lawyer) to this fraudulent system? he's trying to scare pple into not standing up for themselves......what a crook!
The man took off the license plate, threw away his license, drove around for 18 months and loudly proclaimed that he did those things, and wanted to be cited and have his vehicle towed.
And "lawyer McSlave" says the their was not evidence to prove him guilty.
@paulrollins and all the other M O T H E R F U C I< S:
The courts were unable to prove jurisdiction; They first must prove standing and corpus delicti. This is of course impossible, as standing requires a natural born human being to claim "personal injury". This means that even though they CAN prove "territorial" and "personal" jurisdiction, since they cannot prove "subject matter" jurisdiction; they have to dismiss the case with prejudice, never to be discussed or CHARGED EVER AGAIN.
Freedom advocates should not engage in name calling, makes the entire community look bad. Of course, if you had taken the time to read and reflect on my comment, you would see that I am a freedom advocate as well.
I know about traveling, and jurisdiction, and invite you to familyguardian to read the free book titled "The Great IRS Hoax". There might be something in there that you don't know yet.
Attorney Griff Anderson is a tool of the system. Why don't you ask someone who really knows the law next time. The state can not make laws that deny your rights and liberties guaranteed by the founding documents and the common law of the land. Any real attorney would know that.
Dear Mr. 'Lawyer We Asked' (if in fact that is your REAL name)... Please show us WHERE in the Constitution of the United States, or ANY State Constitution, that it states that any State has the authority to 'regulate' a persons 'travel'. Law Lesson 101 for YOU Mr Lawyer... 'Driving' and 'Traveling' are 2 different things. Start there, and someday you may have a better understanding of the Law. Judges 'dismiss' these cases as to avoid embarassment when losing the guranteed appeal.
@Kesava1975 I dont care what book you suggest I read you hit me in an accident without insurance and I WANT MY CAR FIXED OR MONEY!!!!!!! And I aint no Bureaucrat while we are on the topic I wonder where Mary Elizabeth lives in a home a trailer a cave? And how did she take payment from her book sales?
@rabbitphobia The book is free, not everybody is out to take from the world. Some are peaceful and help others without charging for it. It might seem odd to you if you are used to looking to the government for all your permissions and your salvation from harm. They take only when they can get more from you than they take, some peaceful and free inhabitants give and share without requiring your SOUL.
@paulrollins I do NOT look to anyone or any institution either private, public or government for permission or salvation in any way shape or form BUT what happens if I have spent a large amount of capital in a vehicle and this guy OR YOU rear ends me? Should I listen to your tripe about living peaceful and free inhabitants bla bla bla no that wouldnt cover it you would be in a world of trouble and yes I would take the matter in my own hands.
Judges are starting to figure out they better start siding with the people and the constitution REAL fast. Lawyers are completely out of control and are causing much harm to the people.
Like making me buy health insurance? Regulate. Go fuck yourself all you fucking pos faggot lawyers. Your day is coming. We won't put up with your Social engineering anymore.
I volunarily surrendered my NC-DL 2 years ago. I do have a foreign DL and I was also ticketed for not having a "Valid Driver's License" and an "Expired Registration". I went to court and told the Judge that according to U.S.C. Title 18 Part 1 Chapter 2 that my truck didn't fit the legal description of a "Motor Vehicle".
Both charges were dismissed and the DA almost had a nevous break down.
yeah lawyer fuktard, you have to say the right things in court to win, too bad the lawyers wont do it for you, they are a worthless piece of this corrupt system adn we dont need you , bye bye you will eventually be obsolete and have to learn the real law which we are gonna revert back to, again , bye bye
@stevegrello it must be noted that the lawyer is talking about driving and switches terms with "the way people travel" which is not the same. Driving is defined as performing commerce on the state highways such as transporting people or goods, goods and people for a fee. You can read up on it in your states traffic code. So you are not operating a commercial motor vehicle - you are traveling in your convenience (bicycle, car, carriage). You do not need a license to travel - read constitution.
if you need to know anything read....two weeks of corpus delecti and actually find you rights will do u good. you dont have any if you dont know them so do yourselves a favor
I hope this guy hops on here from time to time, I would like to ask him how he fought the right to travel and how he went about it. I battled the "Driver's Licensing Vs. Right to Travel," but the Judge implied that because I got it off the internet, it was fraud, or invalid.
I am asking for the help of the people! I think I'll just pay off the fine, get my Driver's License reinstated and buy another car and then start a new battle on the Rights to Travel, and find out how to start of at a higher court then a municipal court; that way I'll have my own means of transportation. Alero 2004 at yaho dot coom
I want to notify the public, if you already don't know, that the courts are a laughing joke! I'm speaking small municipal courts. My trial was an arbitrary one. The Judge, like typical, was on the side of the Prosecutor, regardless of my case! How do we all start to take back our Rights to Travel? Maybe I went about it all wrong, or did something went wrong, but I ask just ask how to reclaim our Rights?
wrong, the constitution doesnt give us a single right.. it lists our rights as rights the government cant infringe upon, but we had those rights before the damn constitution was written...besides, its ultimately each of your responsibilities to defend your own rights, and thats a good reason not to let your government infringe upon your right to have guns.. law can help protect your rights or it can become your master and take away all your rights.. dont be a fool
His problem was going to court in the first place. He should have sent a notarized letter to the Court with a 10-day response time, asking (in legal language) exactly how he had "victimized" the State.
The State is claiming to be an injured party, for someone who is not driving commercially according to their own rules!
Hi folks, HERE IS ONE VIDEO THAT GIVES YOU THE TOOLS TO STOP the Government Abuse. Learn how you, your family and friends have the power, you just need a little knowledge. Learn what it means to be a Juror, and register to vote, not so you can vote, but so you can be the one Juror who saves that one Citizen who refuses to be a SLAVE. Help educate those around you. liberatedjoe@ yahoo.com
Common Law rights are not blanket coverage, there needs to be personal research and claims to back it up. First one must establish their status, i.e. Citizen or citizen etc...Most common mistakes are disclosing/possessing evidences of government contracts (D/Ls - SS# - birth cert. - marriage lic.) any one of which identifies you as subject to be governed. Traffic cops are only providing the services that you agreed/contracted them to perform, by signing the D/L contract. OH you didn't read it.
The right to travel is not bestowed upon us by any man or document. We are born with that right, however we also have the right to contract. That is where we loose our rights in exchange for privileges.
The 14th amendment created fictions/US citizens, that are subjects to congress and all of its statutes, there are still State Citizens for whom congress is subject to.
The created can not be larger then the creator.
If you are truly free then act like it, dissolve your contracts.
PEOPLE: SULLIVAN LOST. Mr. Sullivan was cited again after this took place. He was found guilty by a judge then he appealed and was found guilty by a jury, then he appealed again and the verdict was upheld by the appellate court. He lost.
Google "Donald Sullivan" "North of Carolina" "Right to travel" and read the pdf file that comes up. The court lists and then refutes each of his arguments.
B.A.R. = British Accredited Registry , nothing but a Royal scam in the ass ! The U.S did not win the war of independence but America was emancipated (legal transfer of ownership) with the condition that the U.S.A Inc. would pay a perpetual tax as payment with no fixed limit of duration or forever ( whichever comes first). It's a continuation of government that has always existed for centuries. $ Money and those that worship it is the root of ALL evil .
this lawyers JOB, is to protect the racket of the illegal and unconstitutional "Bar" and every member (aka: officer) in it. GO GREEN, RECYCLE CONGRESS - VOTE LAWYERS OUT!
@worryphree I'm a libertarian so I wish Sullivan had won but the lawyer is not lying. Precedent was not set and the law was not ruled unconstitutional. Sullivan was simply found not guilty of violating the statute in THAT particular instance. He lost afterwards when he was retried.
A license is a contract that belongs to your avatar with capital letters. We don't need permission from these coporations. Licence doesn't make u drive any better its no human no human flesh. Just there in your wallet an a money collector to pay us debt to federal reserve. Peace
lawyers have sold their souls to the devil to be members of the bar assn. Screw the lawyers. They are cohorts in this scheme contrived by Edward House and his government thugs. They should be hanged with the judges. The cops are ignorant as they have no idea what evils they're doing. They think they are doing good. They will risk their own lives to save others and cannot be considered evil. They get off with a warning. Judges and lawyers get the gallows.
I am living in North Carolina and I'm NOT a Carolinian! I was a NC State employee when I first moved down and smelled a rat immediately in Gov. Weasly. As a matter of fact that dick tried to get me fired when I criticized him publicly. Now he'll be lucky to stay out of jail for his actions while in office. One thing I was appalled at was that he is named as "His Excellency" on NC deeds (I bought property for the state.)! That is an OUTRAGE and a joke. "Excellency" my ass! FMOTL.
@provc That's why we had the "Titles of Nobility Amendment" to the U.S. Constitution in 1810.
The Founders were very, very, very much against the British "honours system" that awards titles to idiots like Elton John so the sheeple must now call him "Sir".
I'm a libertarian so I wish he had been successful but unfortunately apparently Mr. Sullivan was cited again after this took place. He was found guilty by a judge then he appealed and was found guilty by a jury, then he appealed again and the verdict was upheld by the appellate court. He lost.
Google Sullivan v. State of North of Carolina and read the second pdf file that comes up. The court lists and then refutes each of his arguments. :-(
This man lives in one of the most corrupt states in the union. I lived there for 58 years. The yellow dog Democrats have ruined it. They OWN corruption. North Carolina taxes everything. People who have left-like me-call it North Taxolina.
Man...I sure would like to see the lawyer-boy being ass-raped by a bunch of gorillas. He is trying really hard to defend his profession...what a wanker.
I have mixed emotions about this case. 1) I admire the guy because of his spirit of independence. Personally, I think auto registration rates are too high in California. Since we have the most drivers of any state, I think we should get a discount. If I had my way, there would be a one time registration fee per owner. 2) I respect each state's right to uphold public safety laws (how many of you would want someone driving on the road who's not a safe driver?).
I let mine expire almost two years ago and haven't had any issues besides opening a new bank account. I argued and won the fight. I was allowed to enter a USAF base and have passed a Homeland Security background clearance all with my expired license. They only want your taxes, they could care less if you have card in your pocket. Neither the USAF or Homeland has jurisdiction over my license, so they had to accept the ID I provided. Do not let them muscle you. We are a sovereign people.
@1985lsf You did not have to provide them with any ID. Homeland Security only has jurisdiction if you consent to their authority or are in DC or their territories.
§ 3 TITLE 18—CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
§ 5. United States defined
The term ‘‘United States’’, as used in this title
in a territorial sense, includes all places and waters,
continental or insular, subject to the jurisdiction
@mejesus no, it doesn't. The government would have states issue a federally recognized ID to privilege you access for international commercial flights, access to federal buildings and nuclear power plants. The states would not require you to carry this ID nor do they require a drivers license. About half the states currently do not allow the issuance of a federal ID because it greatly increases privacy risks.
@1985lsf Help, help, help!!! Help me, PLEASE! I know we are the sovereign people, but that's not really worth anything unless we can fight them on that. I AM TRYING!!!! HELP SOMEONE
calm down spanky, u dont wanna fight anyone thats not what being free is all about, ur as free as u think u are no one can take that away from u , however ive been in this information for awhile i can give u a place to start.. but u gotta ready your mind and soul to be a peaceful man of the land second only to ur creator
The people should have never allowed the government to regulate how one travels. Think of when horses were used to travel. Nobody needed any permission to get on a horse & travel anywhere they wished. The excuse is that for the public's safety, a driver must be licensed as qualified. But horses aren't automatically safe & first day licensed drivers aren't either, until they've gained repeated experience. In which case, unlicensed drivers will learn just the same. The true crux of the matter is
that anytime "permission" is required from the government, that is inherently the inverse of the principle concept of "we the people". Sometimes its necessary but for driving its not & the more often government is given the authority to require that the people obtain their permission when not truly necessary, the more empowered with authoritarianism the government becomes. Once started down that road, the undesirable situation simply escalates. The government has determined driving is not a
right of the people, but a privilege granted. Yet, not a single government official has paid for the roads & highways with their personal money. The people's money has paid for them & public institutions own them but "we the people" are the public institutions. Yet, we're told that we don't have rights to them. It gets worse. They use the people's driving & roads to generate revenues for themselves with a plethora of possible violations, parking infractions & a ridiculous system of vehicle
registration that's the little brother of the IRS' "graduated income tax". The more money you earn, the more its going to cost you. In theory, registration fees are for use of the roads & the wear one puts on them. But a heavy vehicle can have little value & a lightweight vehicle can have great value & weight is the primary cause of road wear. Thus, why should the value of a vehicle be the determiner of the amount due? This is clearly a case of authoritarianism usurping the power of
"we the people". Also, EPA regulations are causative of newer, more valuable vehicles being required. Thus, greater fees. In California, auto insurance is mandated by law. The media, being part of the corporate oligarchy, saturated the public's awareness with the problem of uninsured, illegal aliens whom were often at fault & the victim driver was left with the bill. But both parties of the Federal government have desired permeable borders to maintain a good flow of the illegal immigrant
"slave class". Also, insurance companies are owned by private citizens. Yet, other citizen business owners don't have the luxury of legislation mandating that all persons be their patrons. Insurance company upper management can spend 5 days a week on the fairways & in the topless bars but couldn't have a failed business if they tried even harder than that. They have better than FDIC insured. All this, & Los Angeles being the driving capitol of the world, still has what seem like 1937 freeways.
After adding all of LA's lucrative industries & concentrated population's taxes to the ridiculous amount of revenue generated by the Port of Los Angeles & one can only wonder why the 5 - 60 - 10 junction cuts the interstate traffic down to 2 lanes, still in 2010? Its a department of the state that requires drivers have a license. Yet, the governor was in violation ... and for all that, permission costs the people plenty!
@dave240vert its not unique, the only things different from him and you is he choose to stand on his right to travel freely while others let the corrupt courts walk all over theirs.
@polevaultrockstr um, not really. the lawyer said that the case was unique because of the specific situation. he also stated that people have routinely tried to fight the same battle and lost. this man won because of how the cop acted it seems, the cop messed something up. i said journalism fail because they don't explain what exactly happened on the side of the road to allow the guy to win the case. and being the only case of this matter where the state actually lost, i would say it is unique.
@dave240vert not the only case. should check out whats happening in nh. check out riddleyreport here on yt. LOOK IT UP. and, dude, if you are repeating what the LAWYER said as fact...you should be slapped in the back of the head! you KNOW they are all liars. period. and it does work. i personaly, do not give them jurisdiction at all to even rule on the case in the first place. dont even go to court. summons is just an invitation. i politely decline their offer and dont go.
Myself, I disagree that the Constitution "gives" anyone the right to travel, instead, I believe that the Constitution "recognizes" a right that already exists.
To say that the Consitution can give anything would imply that a paper document has authority over a flesh and blood man, which it does not have.
The lawyer at the end is dead wrong. Yes lower courts have upheld that states can regulate what they call "driving" but the supreme court has always upheld the idea that to make "driving " a privilege is to deny an individual a basic right. It was in the Articles of Confederation and not included in the Constitution because the founders knew it was so fundamental how could it even come into question? See Saenz v Roe and Shapiro v Thompson. In Shapiro v Thompson Justice Stewart stated (cont.)
@okltsply "It is a right broadly assertable against private interference as well as governmental action. Like the right of association, it is a virtually unconditional personal right." That quote is clear in it's meaning, the states have no right to regulate a person travelling and not engaged in commerce. You can only be regulated if you consent, that's why you have to sign your D.L. ,tickets, and court papers indicating your agreement to pay fines.They are all contracts that you agree to.
@okltsply That's why 99% percent of cases where people don't have a license(never entered into contract) and stand up for their rights, are thrown out of court because even though the lower courts have ruled for the states the fear of an individual filing a Federal civil rights lawsuit and naming individual police officers, judges D.A.'s is not worth it to most jurisdictions. Why go through that when you can pick the low hanging fruit? The guy who just wants to pay his fine and get out.
Moor-pheus told you, the matrix is everywhere, its all around u, even now in this very room. U can "see" it when you look out your window or when u turn on your televison. U can "feel" it when you go to church, when you pay your taxes. It is the world that has pulled over your eyes to blind u from the truth...
Can see where your coming from about registration, but not having insurance is just plain crazy, what happens if you bang up yours or someone else's car?
Also isn't car tax for keeping the roads up to scratch, if you don't want to pay that then how can you drive on the roads it pays for?
@n8style Fuel taxes keep up the roads you pay that at the pump. As far as any accidents that take place if you cause an accident you should be responsible and can be held responsible through civil law, and if the person who caused the accident can't pay too bad it's called life. I'd rather take that chance than have some corporation extorting money from me every month. The "Financial responsibility" scam was thought up by the insurance companies. A captive customer base, sweet deal for them.
@okltsply So say you caused an accident you'd rather pay the entire cost of it all in one go rather than a little bit once a month that you can plan on? Sure the insurance companies make money from it but that's what businesses do, there's got to be something in it for them too if they're making it easier to cope with accidents.
@n8style someone can "cause an accident" by riding a bicylce, jay-walking or swimming. Are you going to suggest that we should not be free to do any activity unless we are licensed and insured?
Also, many "licenses" do not ascertain the qualification of the applicant, it's just a cash-grab...ie fishing license, boating license, marriage license...
@angryadrien I agree with you about licenses, there are some like driving licenses that prove you're qualified to drive which are needed, but others do seem a bit superfluous and the fact that you have to pay for it is quite convenient!
As far as insurance goes, it depends on how big a possible accident you could cause, you wouldn't be able to do much damage on a bike or while walking or swimming. A car is a different story though so imo it just makes sense to spread the risk.
@n8style thanks for the reply. Here in Canada, our laws mention something about mandatory universal insurance....when was the last time you drove throughout the universe?
I'm still studying it but it kinda implies that we are already covered (probably when the vehicle is "registered" since we subrogate true title to the Crown, so they have legal title to the vehicle and probably the obligation to provide insurance at no cost to the "driver/traveller/operator"), we'll see what I can learn.
@n8style Ever heard of the uninsured drivers fund? Funded by violators. But they require you to buy additional insurance so they can keep the peoples money and use it for thier own purposes (wars, swat teams, bailouts, interest bearing investments, etc). Everyone's already insured. IT's just another scam to steal our money!
@n8style No I'm not I look at the books. You don't think there's a conspiracy going on? To remove your rights? What cave have you been living in? lol no offense, but people don't read the law and I don't think you have. I do. So I have a pretty good idea of what I'm talking about. The gov has VAST financial surpluses. But those surpluses are use to generate additional income for individuals in the goverment. Look at Consolidated Annual Financial Reports for your state. Look at the SURPLUS column
Why not?! If no one and no property is damaged, then where is the offense? You can not enforce codes, regulations and pet peeves based on a potential, otherwise we would all be imprisoned, on death row etc. because we all have the potential to kill one another!
economy hitting hard? stop paying registration, insurance. you also know you dont have to pay taxes either. state or federal! atleast not for your labor,. only profits and gains
They can "regulate" it all they want. The fact is that driving without a license or registration is not a crime. Freedom to travel is, indeed, an important aspect of the citizen's "liberty". We are first concerned with the extent, if any, to which Congress has authorized its curtailment. (Road) Kent vs. Dulles. 357 U.S. 116, 127.
The lawyers only say that because they are "officers of the court" so pretty much everyone in the courtroom works for the same corporation. Plus, lawyers don't make money if people represent themselves. Plus, it's not uncommon...just look all over the internet. Plus, the lawyer said we are required to have license plates and insurance...notice he didn't mention drivers licenses???
The attorney in this interview says that the state cannot prohibit travels, but the state can regulate travel.Well, If I have a private automobile of which is intended for my own private travel, and the state, county, city etc. inform me that I cannot use my private automobile for my own private travels unless I hold a valid state issued drivers license, then wouldn't this reality constitute prohibition of travel? Furthermore, where does this authority to regulate my private property stem from?!
Attorney Griff Anderson is not educated to the rights bestowed upon us by our Creator. He is possibly a BAR attorney, which means he is supporting the Courts in his statements, and basically fear mongering on a subtle level. Truth is truth, and truth is we have rights that cannot be converted into privileges. We are tricked into believing we need to have the license, registration, etc,.. and thereby give up our rights. To register is to give up ownership, to license is to regulate a privilege.
get at the end is an idiot. if it's granted to you it's not a right it's a privilege!! And if you regulate something so heavily you are essentially banning anyone who doesn't want to go through the awesome process of the DMV. I agree with this guy I'm sick of the government acting like it's my sovereign! I fail to see it's legitimacy to tell me to do stupid shit like get a license for this and that
One of the problems this horses ass lawyer has is understanding that the STATE is a FICTION and doesn't exist except in demented minds like his. He lives in OZ and believes the WIZARD floating over his head is REAL. PEOPLE that are AGENTS of the "state" are who we are dealing with. THEY are the PSYCHOPATHS in control at this time and are willing to ROB, RAPE and PLUNDER the NORMAL people in the name of "Government". The Constitution doesn't give any rights. If there was none you could travel.
The "STATE" is a municipal corporation and CANNOT regulate travel, as a coporation cannot own the public highways, set boundaries, or territorialize them. The states, and the legal mafia community do not want to lose one of their biggest cash cows, because this is what licenses, plates, etc. are all about.
first thing you do if you do get to the court process is state that you claim common law jurisdiction. don't EVER EVER EVER hire a lawyer unless you want him to take your rights away. then tell the judge or whoever that you DO NOT CONSENT and WAIVE THE BENEFIT. case dismissed,
Just showing up to court and answering the charge, is cause for them to govern you under their jurisdiction (he who answers to a name, is that name). The object is to lawfully refrain from even showing up in court. Research "common law abatement" Its a pretrial filing/ request to correct defects of process, and that when corrected you will lawfully appear, i.e. "name in all CAPs"
Courts=Las Vegas, If you cant afford to lose, don't play
the lawyer is a buffoon... NO ONE can stop you from exercising your common law rights!!! America is under the common law jurisdiction... this case was NOT exceptional I know many who have done it and everyone can do it, you just have to inform yourself instead of letting the media trick you.+
When you get a license, you give up your right to travel and get "privledges" such as police, registration,license,etc.
I don't know about ya'll, but the right to travel has been in the constitution since the begninning, and i haven't had a license in 20 years. 15 court dates later, i am still driving, and won every single court appearance due to my constitutional rights as a US citizen. Fuck the Nazi propaganda and fuck the police.
@MrMaryJanes yes but as a US Citizen you only have Privileges not rights according the the 14th amendment therefore the right to travel does not apply to "US Citizens"
I'm not being a jerk, but your descriptions need refining, because words & descriptions matter in court.
1) The common law right to travel, predates the constitution. The constitution does NOT bestow rights to men, it simply reiterates the fact that those already established unalienable rights are not to be hindered.
2) "my constitutional rights as a US citizen" = 14th amendment rights, and if studied you will discover that those are in fact benefit privileges that can be taken away.
im going to court in moor county for the same thing this month
IamaMoor 4 days ago
The common law folk know exactly why this guy got off the hook.
ghostclownprophet 6 days ago
Well done! Now to tell the lawyers that we dont need them anymore and to go get a job flipping burgers. Their are more lawyers in law school right now than their are lawyers in all america. They want work so they keep passing laws to arrest people. Thats why this guy says this doesnt work. It shows it does b/c the constitution says you have a right to travel. Plates and licenses and registrations are only for commerce. Start suing lawers and cops! Get our rights back!!
4swordkeeper 1 week ago
has no bearing????this 'attorney" is a dork!
the LAW says....the law is the constitution...duh...he is a liar.
bakersfieldmusicnow 2 weeks ago 2
@bakersfieldmusicnow well said!
4swordkeeper 1 week ago
ok he said they can regulate but not prohibit. I don't see a difference between the two. Because you are prohibiting travel by making them get something in order to do it. Hell you can't even walk up Interstates through your state. They arrest you or if they are "nice" they drive you to BFE and drop you. I am all for safety..I am for responsibility. I am not for being told what to do if I am not endangering anyone but myself. Our government is an overprotective grandma...that you don't visit.
DedHedJosh 1 month ago
That lawyer is a fucking LIAR! The state can regulates "drivers", it's not the same thing as being a "traveler". Mode of travel is INCONSEQUENTIAL! That bastard is money hungry, he may as well be a Ferengi, he cares NOTHING for the rights of the citizens.
loveunderlaw 1 month ago
That attorney should be hanged along with every other one who knowingly distorts the truth.
crackahcrackah 1 month ago
Lol that attorney cracks me up. The State government can only regulate drivers not travelers. This case does set precedence for other courts. Has this guy not heard of common law? Common law is past cases that have set precedence for current cases. I currently use 212 cases to prove the right to travel. I have beat 21 tickets using 97 of them. Right now I am on my 23rd case and know that I have already won. lol Evidently anyone can graduate law school.
SiRTim1000 1 month ago 2
@SiRTim1000 THANK YOU! It's nice to see others that understand the World criminal banker scam for what it is. Trying to convert our rights into privileges that you MUST pay for, they, & their cronies all get a cut of the extortion pie they've grown so fond of over the years.
loveunderlaw 1 month ago
The lawyer is lying or he committed gross negligence which is equal to fraud.
lema4 1 month ago 4
a guy in a suit named "this lawyer" said stuff about the law.. wut.
Its funny, he talked about "Upheld the right of the state to regulate"-"By requiring licenses, License plates, and requirement of insurance"
For what? Haha, to drive a commercial vehicle? Or to operate a car?
Vague terms without definition is the exact opposite of law.
hohohoho578 2 months ago 2
Just a question that immediately came to my mind after hearing the lawyer. Is not driving on a road, a way to regulate travel?. Seriously, you dont see folks driving willy nilly anywhere they choose. If you think of regulation in terms of a system that actually seeks to protect life, and property...a road is regulating. IN that same way it seems that rules of the road would only apply if you there is damage to life and property. Those rules then only being a tool for the damaged party.
tonysshadow 2 months ago
Winning on a technicality is NOT a victory for the so-called right to travel BS.
MickScarborough 3 months ago
@MickScarborough IT'S NOT BS YOU BANKER SHILL!
loveunderlaw 1 month ago
"person" is required by statute to have a drivers license, BUT We the People have a right to travel on public roads. If you can read this you are NOT a "person". A "person" is a corporation, trust, etc. Pursuant to 28 sec. 3002 (10) of the U. S. Code Annotated. They act on your state created trust account named YOUR NAME in all capital letters, (like corporations.) File a Notice of Understanding and Intent, Claim of Right(s), and Fee Schedule and get your proper political status back.
dennyaudio 3 months ago
@dennyaudio A "person" is a creation of the World banker criminal syndicate, NOT the same thing as a NATURAL BORN CITIZEN!
loveunderlaw 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Is it really that hard to just spend a bit of your time to get your tags?
akashminhas1 3 months ago
Yeah that liar is a lawyer, I mean lawyer is a liar.
videocommenter67 4 months ago
When it comes to DRIVING the law is clear but it's also clear when it comes to TRAVELLING as well.DRIVING is a commercial venture and travelling is a private one which requires no registering or lincensing.
2wheels88 4 months ago
That lawyer is a LIAR, LIcenses, Registrations , are for Drivers of Motor vehicles, not someone traveling in an automobile. As more and more people challenge this violation things will improve. Our kids kids will thank us for it.
akmrmike 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
HIs truck is considered a classic. Didnt' you notice? It's over 20 years old..
C4lWXHPLS 5 months ago
HIs truck is considered a clissic. Didn' you notice? It's over 20 years old..
C4lWXHPLS 5 months ago
Why do you need permission to drive on public roads if you are the public?
Hey guys, I'm the public...I hereby give you all permission to drive on my roads.
wesmatron 5 months ago
@wesmatron Great, thank you! : )
videocommenter67 4 months ago
@videocommenter67 You are welcome. There's no direct charge, but it would be nice if everyone who used them chipped-in a small amount just to make sure they stay well-maintained. Apart from that.....enjoy.
wesmatron 4 months ago
@wesmatron I do every time I fill my tank : )
videocommenter67 4 months ago
@videocommenter67 I think you're paying too much then. We need to work something better out
wesmatron 4 months ago
@wesmatron lol okay let me know if you think of anything. I'm in battle fighting these debt collectors..... aaarrrggg!
videocommenter67 4 months ago
@videocommenter67 Debt collectors? Ask them for a bill and evidence of the contract. See what they say.
wesmatron 4 months ago
@wesmatron Yeah that is what I'm going to do for Sallie Mae. I have a letter that will make them put up or shut up.....lol It asks for a Bona Fide Proof of Claim.
videocommenter67 4 months ago
@videocommenter67 Try calling them and asking:are you licensed to collect debt in this state (and have verfiy it in writing). They need to send you a debt validation letter proving you owe the debt. Ask them if they legally purchased the debt from the original creditor. What interest/fees have been tacked on-check state laws. I called a debt collector attorney and they told me they would not be pursuing my debt any further lol. File a cease and desist letter and they have to stop bothering you.
andresenr1 3 months ago
@andresenr1 Yeah I tried the Cease and Desist with AES, didn't work. But I have my plan to get rid of the whole thing. So all is well. : )
videocommenter67 3 months ago
Comment removed
videocommenter67 4 months ago
The lawyer at the end is a liar, you dont need those things to travel.
He's only saying what the legal masters are telling to say.
REGULATE! what regulation? regulation is only required if your operating in commerce.
If he's talking about stop signs, speed zones, schools zones & so forth, YES, those are regulations WE have to follow, lets not get crazy.
He is trying to make it seem like.. "PEOPLE OUT THERE IN TV LAND DONT TRY THIS OR ELSE" "BULLSHIT" The secret is out.
BadassCeino 6 months ago
The procesutor has already commited FRAUD UPON THE COURT as soon as the Trial begins because he/she is required to pay the filing fees with the clerk. The State (NC) requires that the plaintiff (State) pays the filing fees...otherwise a trial can't take place.
The fed. rules of civil proceedures lists only one type of action...a "CIVIL ACTION" there is no such thing as a criminal action...IT IS ALL CIVIL. If it is civil, then who is making a claim? Who is the injured/damaged party?
younitehumanity 7 months ago
"An Insurance policy is a maritime contract and therefore of admiralty jurisdiction". Delovio v. Boit
An "Operator" is defined under USC Title 49 Sec. 31301 as an EMPLOYEE!
An Officer can not give anybody a citation, summons anyone into a court room or even act upon probable cause because those are judicial determinations and the officer is not sworn in as a judicial officer...he only has executive powers...NO JUDICIAL POWERS AT ALL!!!
younitehumanity 7 months ago
I find it interesting that the attorney featured denies the practice of precendent (which is practiced so often in so many cases) when he claims that this case has no bearing on future cases.
iRLadyKi113r 7 months ago
@iRLadyKi113r Yeah the Attorney is an idiot or was told to say that.
videocommenter67 4 months ago
guess what , fools...the constitution doesnt give you any rights...the constitution is the rulebook that the people gave the federal government, which has long since been ignored... now your frankenstein creation has ruled us for over 200 years with the gun..if you think we are free, while this government throws us in prison and murders people that disobey it, youre a mindless idiot
longfootbuddy 8 months ago
Lying scumbag lawyer, Supreme Court decisions are the law of the land.
akmrmike 8 months ago 2
that lawyer is a fucking NWO shill douche bag scum
JOINTHERESISTANCE1 8 months ago 3
This scum bag lawyer talks just like the police bosses who tell you that you should not believe anything is wrong when you see a video of a cop beating someone who is under their control. This guy will most probably burn in hell should he not reform his ways.
akmrmike 9 months ago 2
That so call lawyer is a LIAR. He knows it, He work for the Establishment. The Bar Association. You dont need a Contract to drive aka license, or registration. all this is BS. you need know your RIGHTs.
da13thsun 9 months ago 12
@da13thsun You have been proven wrong in all states
MickScarborough 3 months ago
The lawyer may be correct, but the fact of the matter is, there is a certain circumstance which allowed this guy to avoid the taxman, and all that need be done is make sure this circumstance remains.
No surprise then that he does not elaborate about what exactly that circumstance is eh?
zppz 10 months ago 3
This has been flagged as spam show
man not charging the cop looks as if cops are above the law while people go to prison for selling weed or weed seeds ohhh the irony cops beat teens=OKAY civilian sells weed=PRISON I think we need to take a deep look at the judical system as a hole and fire all them cops that have a history of violence and or 15 mins of angry i never got my job back and i dump a kid out of his chair I was fired quick the cop beats the teen and gets hired back too a police force no no no
rhinolimits21 10 months ago
the lawyer is full of shit,his loyalty is to the BAR British Accredition Register,not to you. None but you can claim your rights and if you don't know what they are you don't have any.Lawyers do not know law,they know procedure only. We still have the Constitution a Common Law Trust doc ,learn it ,apply it and be really free! The right to travel freely and unencombered is a long held Constitutionally protected right,I have no license as I do not drive,I travel..
justaman6972 10 months ago
Most cops are good except for the majority of them--the blood-thirsty maniacs. All that the good cops can do is to bear witness to the bad cops who routinely punch, kick, tase and pummel handcuffed citizens.
procommenter 11 months ago
what else one can expect from an advocate(Lawyer) to this fraudulent system? he's trying to scare pple into not standing up for themselves......what a crook!
DATSMY 11 months ago
The man took off the license plate, threw away his license, drove around for 18 months and loudly proclaimed that he did those things, and wanted to be cited and have his vehicle towed.
And "lawyer McSlave" says the their was not evidence to prove him guilty.
paulrollins 11 months ago
@paulrollins and all the other M O T H E R F U C I< S:
The courts were unable to prove jurisdiction; They first must prove standing and corpus delicti. This is of course impossible, as standing requires a natural born human being to claim "personal injury". This means that even though they CAN prove "territorial" and "personal" jurisdiction, since they cannot prove "subject matter" jurisdiction; they have to dismiss the case with prejudice, never to be discussed or CHARGED EVER AGAIN.
Chunkylover712 11 months ago 2
@Chunkylover712
Freedom advocates should not engage in name calling, makes the entire community look bad. Of course, if you had taken the time to read and reflect on my comment, you would see that I am a freedom advocate as well.
I know about traveling, and jurisdiction, and invite you to familyguardian to read the free book titled "The Great IRS Hoax". There might be something in there that you don't know yet.
paulrollins 11 months ago
How does Donald feel about the air force 24/7 chemtrail genocide??
cdimmm 11 months ago
LIars, er lawyers don't know "law". They know procedure, just like cops. Cops don't have the foggest clue about "law", they only know procedure.
worldwidebum 1 year ago 3
Attorney Griff Anderson is a tool of the system. Why don't you ask someone who really knows the law next time. The state can not make laws that deny your rights and liberties guaranteed by the founding documents and the common law of the land. Any real attorney would know that.
bugsz1 1 year ago
Dear Mr. 'Lawyer We Asked' (if in fact that is your REAL name)... Please show us WHERE in the Constitution of the United States, or ANY State Constitution, that it states that any State has the authority to 'regulate' a persons 'travel'. Law Lesson 101 for YOU Mr Lawyer... 'Driving' and 'Traveling' are 2 different things. Start there, and someday you may have a better understanding of the Law. Judges 'dismiss' these cases as to avoid embarassment when losing the guranteed appeal.
tazztt1 1 year ago
And if you have an accident with no insurance?
rabbitphobia 1 year ago
@rabbitphobia Go read "How I Clobbered Every Bureaucratic
Cash-Confiscatory Agency Known To Man" by Mary Elizabeth Croft
Kesava1975 1 year ago
@Kesava1975 I dont care what book you suggest I read you hit me in an accident without insurance and I WANT MY CAR FIXED OR MONEY!!!!!!! And I aint no Bureaucrat while we are on the topic I wonder where Mary Elizabeth lives in a home a trailer a cave? And how did she take payment from her book sales?
rabbitphobia 1 year ago
@rabbitphobia
Her book is available free.. see her Spiritual Economics website. :-)
antoconno 1 year ago
@rabbitphobia The book is free, not everybody is out to take from the world. Some are peaceful and help others without charging for it. It might seem odd to you if you are used to looking to the government for all your permissions and your salvation from harm. They take only when they can get more from you than they take, some peaceful and free inhabitants give and share without requiring your SOUL.
paulrollins 11 months ago
@paulrollins I do NOT look to anyone or any institution either private, public or government for permission or salvation in any way shape or form BUT what happens if I have spent a large amount of capital in a vehicle and this guy OR YOU rear ends me? Should I listen to your tripe about living peaceful and free inhabitants bla bla bla no that wouldnt cover it you would be in a world of trouble and yes I would take the matter in my own hands.
So answer me what then?
rabbitphobia 11 months ago
Judges are starting to figure out they better start siding with the people and the constitution REAL fast. Lawyers are completely out of control and are causing much harm to the people.
holajim 1 year ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
@336Torana EXACTLY! Why are lawyers going to give you the ammo you need, so that you don't feel you need them any longer?
1975hades 1 year ago
Like making me buy health insurance? Regulate. Go fuck yourself all you fucking pos faggot lawyers. Your day is coming. We won't put up with your Social engineering anymore.
TheFloydReport 1 year ago
Precedence. It applys to all who invoke it.
yeshuahfullofit 1 year ago
I volunarily surrendered my NC-DL 2 years ago. I do have a foreign DL and I was also ticketed for not having a "Valid Driver's License" and an "Expired Registration". I went to court and told the Judge that according to U.S.C. Title 18 Part 1 Chapter 2 that my truck didn't fit the legal description of a "Motor Vehicle".
Both charges were dismissed and the DA almost had a nevous break down.
younitehumanity 1 year ago
yeah lawyer fuktard, you have to say the right things in court to win, too bad the lawyers wont do it for you, they are a worthless piece of this corrupt system adn we dont need you , bye bye you will eventually be obsolete and have to learn the real law which we are gonna revert back to, again , bye bye
stevegrello 1 year ago 17
@stevegrello it must be noted that the lawyer is talking about driving and switches terms with "the way people travel" which is not the same. Driving is defined as performing commerce on the state highways such as transporting people or goods, goods and people for a fee. You can read up on it in your states traffic code. So you are not operating a commercial motor vehicle - you are traveling in your convenience (bicycle, car, carriage). You do not need a license to travel - read constitution.
igogosh 10 months ago 3
@igogosh your correct under usc 31 title 18.
tonythesom 9 months ago
if you need to know anything read....two weeks of corpus delecti and actually find you rights will do u good. you dont have any if you dont know them so do yourselves a favor
slickdickdafoola 1 year ago
can you still keep your job if you become a Sovereign Citizen?
delphinny 1 year ago
I hope this guy hops on here from time to time, I would like to ask him how he fought the right to travel and how he went about it. I battled the "Driver's Licensing Vs. Right to Travel," but the Judge implied that because I got it off the internet, it was fraud, or invalid.
Alero02004 1 year ago
I am asking for the help of the people! I think I'll just pay off the fine, get my Driver's License reinstated and buy another car and then start a new battle on the Rights to Travel, and find out how to start of at a higher court then a municipal court; that way I'll have my own means of transportation. Alero 2004 at yaho dot coom
Alero02004 1 year ago
Comment removed
Alero02004 1 year ago
I want to notify the public, if you already don't know, that the courts are a laughing joke! I'm speaking small municipal courts. My trial was an arbitrary one. The Judge, like typical, was on the side of the Prosecutor, regardless of my case! How do we all start to take back our Rights to Travel? Maybe I went about it all wrong, or did something went wrong, but I ask just ask how to reclaim our Rights?
Alero02004 1 year ago
wrong, the constitution doesnt give us a single right.. it lists our rights as rights the government cant infringe upon, but we had those rights before the damn constitution was written...besides, its ultimately each of your responsibilities to defend your own rights, and thats a good reason not to let your government infringe upon your right to have guns.. law can help protect your rights or it can become your master and take away all your rights.. dont be a fool
longfootbuddy 1 year ago
His problem was going to court in the first place. He should have sent a notarized letter to the Court with a 10-day response time, asking (in legal language) exactly how he had "victimized" the State.
The State is claiming to be an injured party, for someone who is not driving commercially according to their own rules!
NoLongerFooled 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Hi folks, HERE IS ONE VIDEO THAT GIVES YOU THE TOOLS TO STOP the Government Abuse. Learn how you, your family and friends have the power, you just need a little knowledge. Learn what it means to be a Juror, and register to vote, not so you can vote, but so you can be the one Juror who saves that one Citizen who refuses to be a SLAVE. Help educate those around you. liberatedjoe@ yahoo.com
Watch this training video with your folks.
youtube.com/watch?v=wNHcKnjrSNE&feature=related
propertyrightsnow 1 year ago
Common Law rights are not blanket coverage, there needs to be personal research and claims to back it up. First one must establish their status, i.e. Citizen or citizen etc...Most common mistakes are disclosing/possessing evidences of government contracts (D/Ls - SS# - birth cert. - marriage lic.) any one of which identifies you as subject to be governed. Traffic cops are only providing the services that you agreed/contracted them to perform, by signing the D/L contract. OH you didn't read it.
gmcmudder1 1 year ago
@gmcmudder1 Most of these comment are freaking funny.
Alero02004 1 year ago
The right to travel is not bestowed upon us by any man or document. We are born with that right, however we also have the right to contract. That is where we loose our rights in exchange for privileges.
The 14th amendment created fictions/US citizens, that are subjects to congress and all of its statutes, there are still State Citizens for whom congress is subject to.
The created can not be larger then the creator.
If you are truly free then act like it, dissolve your contracts.
gmcmudder1 1 year ago
PEOPLE: SULLIVAN LOST. Mr. Sullivan was cited again after this took place. He was found guilty by a judge then he appealed and was found guilty by a jury, then he appealed again and the verdict was upheld by the appellate court. He lost.
Google "Donald Sullivan" "North of Carolina" "Right to travel" and read the pdf file that comes up. The court lists and then refutes each of his arguments.
hardcider09 1 year ago
B.A.R. = British Accredited Registry , nothing but a Royal scam in the ass ! The U.S did not win the war of independence but America was emancipated (legal transfer of ownership) with the condition that the U.S.A Inc. would pay a perpetual tax as payment with no fixed limit of duration or forever ( whichever comes first). It's a continuation of government that has always existed for centuries. $ Money and those that worship it is the root of ALL evil .
ivan00000006 1 year ago
this lawyers JOB, is to protect the racket of the illegal and unconstitutional "Bar" and every member (aka: officer) in it. GO GREEN, RECYCLE CONGRESS - VOTE LAWYERS OUT!
marshamaines 1 year ago
That lawyer is lieing. Precedant always trumps in legal land.
worryphree 1 year ago
@worryphree I'm a libertarian so I wish Sullivan had won but the lawyer is not lying. Precedent was not set and the law was not ruled unconstitutional. Sullivan was simply found not guilty of violating the statute in THAT particular instance. He lost afterwards when he was retried.
hardcider09 1 year ago
A license is a contract that belongs to your avatar with capital letters. We don't need permission from these coporations. Licence doesn't make u drive any better its no human no human flesh. Just there in your wallet an a money collector to pay us debt to federal reserve. Peace
jjhonnyem626 1 year ago
This lawyer is a piece of corporate garbage trying to keep you sheep in line. Don't listen to him. Fight the system.
MrMaryJanes 1 year ago
that (liar) Lawyer is a BAR CARD CLUB MEMBER, and is full of Sh@t!
nonassumsit 1 year ago
lawyers have sold their souls to the devil to be members of the bar assn. Screw the lawyers. They are cohorts in this scheme contrived by Edward House and his government thugs. They should be hanged with the judges. The cops are ignorant as they have no idea what evils they're doing. They think they are doing good. They will risk their own lives to save others and cannot be considered evil. They get off with a warning. Judges and lawyers get the gallows.
provc 1 year ago
I am living in North Carolina and I'm NOT a Carolinian! I was a NC State employee when I first moved down and smelled a rat immediately in Gov. Weasly. As a matter of fact that dick tried to get me fired when I criticized him publicly. Now he'll be lucky to stay out of jail for his actions while in office. One thing I was appalled at was that he is named as "His Excellency" on NC deeds (I bought property for the state.)! That is an OUTRAGE and a joke. "Excellency" my ass! FMOTL.
provc 1 year ago
@provc That's why we had the "Titles of Nobility Amendment" to the U.S. Constitution in 1810.
The Founders were very, very, very much against the British "honours system" that awards titles to idiots like Elton John so the sheeple must now call him "Sir".
NoLongerFooled 1 year ago
Unfortunately, it was never ratified, so you could still have some Rothchild bastard calling themselves "the Duchess of Baltimore", etc.
NoLongerFooled 1 year ago
I'm a libertarian so I wish he had been successful but unfortunately apparently Mr. Sullivan was cited again after this took place. He was found guilty by a judge then he appealed and was found guilty by a jury, then he appealed again and the verdict was upheld by the appellate court. He lost.
Google Sullivan v. State of North of Carolina and read the second pdf file that comes up. The court lists and then refutes each of his arguments. :-(
hardcider09 1 year ago
This man lives in one of the most corrupt states in the union. I lived there for 58 years. The yellow dog Democrats have ruined it. They OWN corruption. North Carolina taxes everything. People who have left-like me-call it North Taxolina.
ConservativeInk 1 year ago
Man...I sure would like to see the lawyer-boy being ass-raped by a bunch of gorillas. He is trying really hard to defend his profession...what a wanker.
younitehumanity 1 year ago
I have mixed emotions about this case. 1) I admire the guy because of his spirit of independence. Personally, I think auto registration rates are too high in California. Since we have the most drivers of any state, I think we should get a discount. If I had my way, there would be a one time registration fee per owner. 2) I respect each state's right to uphold public safety laws (how many of you would want someone driving on the road who's not a safe driver?).
MishuTaste 1 year ago
I let mine expire almost two years ago and haven't had any issues besides opening a new bank account. I argued and won the fight. I was allowed to enter a USAF base and have passed a Homeland Security background clearance all with my expired license. They only want your taxes, they could care less if you have card in your pocket. Neither the USAF or Homeland has jurisdiction over my license, so they had to accept the ID I provided. Do not let them muscle you. We are a sovereign people.
1985lsf 1 year ago 17
@1985lsf You did not have to provide them with any ID. Homeland Security only has jurisdiction if you consent to their authority or are in DC or their territories.
§ 3 TITLE 18—CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
§ 5. United States defined
The term ‘‘United States’’, as used in this title
in a territorial sense, includes all places and waters,
continental or insular, subject to the jurisdiction
of the United States, donotconsent83@yahoo.com
donotconsent83 1 year ago
@1985lsf the Real ID Act 2005 makes any state ID have jurisdiction over you.
mejesus 1 year ago
@mejesus no, it doesn't. The government would have states issue a federally recognized ID to privilege you access for international commercial flights, access to federal buildings and nuclear power plants. The states would not require you to carry this ID nor do they require a drivers license. About half the states currently do not allow the issuance of a federal ID because it greatly increases privacy risks.
reaton33 1 year ago
@1985lsf Help, help, help!!! Help me, PLEASE! I know we are the sovereign people, but that's not really worth anything unless we can fight them on that. I AM TRYING!!!! HELP SOMEONE
Alero02004 1 year ago
@Alero02004
calm down spanky, u dont wanna fight anyone thats not what being free is all about, ur as free as u think u are no one can take that away from u , however ive been in this information for awhile i can give u a place to start.. but u gotta ready your mind and soul to be a peaceful man of the land second only to ur creator
dayzmelttogether 1 year ago
The people should have never allowed the government to regulate how one travels. Think of when horses were used to travel. Nobody needed any permission to get on a horse & travel anywhere they wished. The excuse is that for the public's safety, a driver must be licensed as qualified. But horses aren't automatically safe & first day licensed drivers aren't either, until they've gained repeated experience. In which case, unlicensed drivers will learn just the same. The true crux of the matter is
Chuichupachichi 1 year ago
that anytime "permission" is required from the government, that is inherently the inverse of the principle concept of "we the people". Sometimes its necessary but for driving its not & the more often government is given the authority to require that the people obtain their permission when not truly necessary, the more empowered with authoritarianism the government becomes. Once started down that road, the undesirable situation simply escalates. The government has determined driving is not a
Chuichupachichi 1 year ago
right of the people, but a privilege granted. Yet, not a single government official has paid for the roads & highways with their personal money. The people's money has paid for them & public institutions own them but "we the people" are the public institutions. Yet, we're told that we don't have rights to them. It gets worse. They use the people's driving & roads to generate revenues for themselves with a plethora of possible violations, parking infractions & a ridiculous system of vehicle
Chuichupachichi 1 year ago
registration that's the little brother of the IRS' "graduated income tax". The more money you earn, the more its going to cost you. In theory, registration fees are for use of the roads & the wear one puts on them. But a heavy vehicle can have little value & a lightweight vehicle can have great value & weight is the primary cause of road wear. Thus, why should the value of a vehicle be the determiner of the amount due? This is clearly a case of authoritarianism usurping the power of
Chuichupachichi 1 year ago
"we the people". Also, EPA regulations are causative of newer, more valuable vehicles being required. Thus, greater fees. In California, auto insurance is mandated by law. The media, being part of the corporate oligarchy, saturated the public's awareness with the problem of uninsured, illegal aliens whom were often at fault & the victim driver was left with the bill. But both parties of the Federal government have desired permeable borders to maintain a good flow of the illegal immigrant
Chuichupachichi 1 year ago
"slave class". Also, insurance companies are owned by private citizens. Yet, other citizen business owners don't have the luxury of legislation mandating that all persons be their patrons. Insurance company upper management can spend 5 days a week on the fairways & in the topless bars but couldn't have a failed business if they tried even harder than that. They have better than FDIC insured. All this, & Los Angeles being the driving capitol of the world, still has what seem like 1937 freeways.
Chuichupachichi 1 year ago
After adding all of LA's lucrative industries & concentrated population's taxes to the ridiculous amount of revenue generated by the Port of Los Angeles & one can only wonder why the 5 - 60 - 10 junction cuts the interstate traffic down to 2 lanes, still in 2010? Its a department of the state that requires drivers have a license. Yet, the governor was in violation ... and for all that, permission costs the people plenty!
Chuichupachichi 1 year ago
they didn't say exactly why his case in particular was unique and why he was found not guilty. journalism fail.
dave240vert 1 year ago
@dave240vert its not unique, the only things different from him and you is he choose to stand on his right to travel freely while others let the corrupt courts walk all over theirs.
polevaultrockstr 1 year ago
@polevaultrockstr um, not really. the lawyer said that the case was unique because of the specific situation. he also stated that people have routinely tried to fight the same battle and lost. this man won because of how the cop acted it seems, the cop messed something up. i said journalism fail because they don't explain what exactly happened on the side of the road to allow the guy to win the case. and being the only case of this matter where the state actually lost, i would say it is unique.
dave240vert 1 year ago
@dave240vert not the only case. should check out whats happening in nh. check out riddleyreport here on yt. LOOK IT UP. and, dude, if you are repeating what the LAWYER said as fact...you should be slapped in the back of the head! you KNOW they are all liars. period. and it does work. i personaly, do not give them jurisdiction at all to even rule on the case in the first place. dont even go to court. summons is just an invitation. i politely decline their offer and dont go.
thered702 1 year ago
I love the state bureaucrat saying "this can never happen again... this is the one exception... we are still in control... please listen to me."
iheartdd4eva 1 year ago
Silly guy, doesn't he realize only illegal aliens are allowed to drive without any of that?
blogbat 1 year ago
Myself, I disagree that the Constitution "gives" anyone the right to travel, instead, I believe that the Constitution "recognizes" a right that already exists.
To say that the Consitution can give anything would imply that a paper document has authority over a flesh and blood man, which it does not have.
angryadrien 1 year ago
The lawyer at the end is dead wrong. Yes lower courts have upheld that states can regulate what they call "driving" but the supreme court has always upheld the idea that to make "driving " a privilege is to deny an individual a basic right. It was in the Articles of Confederation and not included in the Constitution because the founders knew it was so fundamental how could it even come into question? See Saenz v Roe and Shapiro v Thompson. In Shapiro v Thompson Justice Stewart stated (cont.)
okltsply 1 year ago
@okltsply "It is a right broadly assertable against private interference as well as governmental action. Like the right of association, it is a virtually unconditional personal right." That quote is clear in it's meaning, the states have no right to regulate a person travelling and not engaged in commerce. You can only be regulated if you consent, that's why you have to sign your D.L. ,tickets, and court papers indicating your agreement to pay fines.They are all contracts that you agree to.
okltsply 1 year ago
@okltsply That's why 99% percent of cases where people don't have a license(never entered into contract) and stand up for their rights, are thrown out of court because even though the lower courts have ruled for the states the fear of an individual filing a Federal civil rights lawsuit and naming individual police officers, judges D.A.'s is not worth it to most jurisdictions. Why go through that when you can pick the low hanging fruit? The guy who just wants to pay his fine and get out.
okltsply 1 year ago
Moor-pheus told you, the matrix is everywhere, its all around u, even now in this very room. U can "see" it when you look out your window or when u turn on your televison. U can "feel" it when you go to church, when you pay your taxes. It is the world that has pulled over your eyes to blind u from the truth...
Peace
ElmahdiiEl 1 year ago
Can see where your coming from about registration, but not having insurance is just plain crazy, what happens if you bang up yours or someone else's car?
Also isn't car tax for keeping the roads up to scratch, if you don't want to pay that then how can you drive on the roads it pays for?
n8style 1 year ago
@n8style Fuel taxes keep up the roads you pay that at the pump. As far as any accidents that take place if you cause an accident you should be responsible and can be held responsible through civil law, and if the person who caused the accident can't pay too bad it's called life. I'd rather take that chance than have some corporation extorting money from me every month. The "Financial responsibility" scam was thought up by the insurance companies. A captive customer base, sweet deal for them.
okltsply 1 year ago
@okltsply So say you caused an accident you'd rather pay the entire cost of it all in one go rather than a little bit once a month that you can plan on? Sure the insurance companies make money from it but that's what businesses do, there's got to be something in it for them too if they're making it easier to cope with accidents.
n8style 1 year ago
@n8style someone can "cause an accident" by riding a bicylce, jay-walking or swimming. Are you going to suggest that we should not be free to do any activity unless we are licensed and insured?
Also, many "licenses" do not ascertain the qualification of the applicant, it's just a cash-grab...ie fishing license, boating license, marriage license...
angryadrien 1 year ago
@angryadrien I agree with you about licenses, there are some like driving licenses that prove you're qualified to drive which are needed, but others do seem a bit superfluous and the fact that you have to pay for it is quite convenient!
As far as insurance goes, it depends on how big a possible accident you could cause, you wouldn't be able to do much damage on a bike or while walking or swimming. A car is a different story though so imo it just makes sense to spread the risk.
n8style 1 year ago
@n8style thanks for the reply. Here in Canada, our laws mention something about mandatory universal insurance....when was the last time you drove throughout the universe?
I'm still studying it but it kinda implies that we are already covered (probably when the vehicle is "registered" since we subrogate true title to the Crown, so they have legal title to the vehicle and probably the obligation to provide insurance at no cost to the "driver/traveller/operator"), we'll see what I can learn.
angryadrien 1 year ago
@n8style Ever heard of the uninsured drivers fund? Funded by violators. But they require you to buy additional insurance so they can keep the peoples money and use it for thier own purposes (wars, swat teams, bailouts, interest bearing investments, etc). Everyone's already insured. IT's just another scam to steal our money!
VerifiedNews 10 months ago
@VerifiedNews ok now you're getting into the paranoid conspiracy theory territory
n8style 10 months ago
@n8style No I'm not I look at the books. You don't think there's a conspiracy going on? To remove your rights? What cave have you been living in? lol no offense, but people don't read the law and I don't think you have. I do. So I have a pretty good idea of what I'm talking about. The gov has VAST financial surpluses. But those surpluses are use to generate additional income for individuals in the goverment. Look at Consolidated Annual Financial Reports for your state. Look at the SURPLUS column
VerifiedNews 10 months ago
@CoolScoobydoo
Why not?! If no one and no property is damaged, then where is the offense? You can not enforce codes, regulations and pet peeves based on a potential, otherwise we would all be imprisoned, on death row etc. because we all have the potential to kill one another!
TheRealRockgod 1 year ago 2
woohoo victory!
mafefus 1 year ago
I do it...
DELTA912420 1 year ago
economy hitting hard? stop paying registration, insurance. you also know you dont have to pay taxes either. state or federal! atleast not for your labor,. only profits and gains
teamgrn 1 year ago 2
yes its called common law
tza420 1 year ago
They can "regulate" it all they want. The fact is that driving without a license or registration is not a crime. Freedom to travel is, indeed, an important aspect of the citizen's "liberty". We are first concerned with the extent, if any, to which Congress has authorized its curtailment. (Road) Kent vs. Dulles. 357 U.S. 116, 127.
Cstrife234 1 year ago
What an awful tie.
lollygaggle 1 year ago
The lawyers only say that because they are "officers of the court" so pretty much everyone in the courtroom works for the same corporation. Plus, lawyers don't make money if people represent themselves. Plus, it's not uncommon...just look all over the internet. Plus, the lawyer said we are required to have license plates and insurance...notice he didn't mention drivers licenses???
samala5793 1 year ago
Comment removed
dwyndwalker 1 year ago
The attorney in this interview says that the state cannot prohibit travels, but the state can regulate travel.Well, If I have a private automobile of which is intended for my own private travel, and the state, county, city etc. inform me that I cannot use my private automobile for my own private travels unless I hold a valid state issued drivers license, then wouldn't this reality constitute prohibition of travel? Furthermore, where does this authority to regulate my private property stem from?!
TheRealRockgod 1 year ago
I would like to see that lawyer ass-raped by big bubba. Every time I hear Lawyers talk...it makes me sick.
younitehumanity 1 year ago
Attorney Griff Anderson is not educated to the rights bestowed upon us by our Creator. He is possibly a BAR attorney, which means he is supporting the Courts in his statements, and basically fear mongering on a subtle level. Truth is truth, and truth is we have rights that cannot be converted into privileges. We are tricked into believing we need to have the license, registration, etc,.. and thereby give up our rights. To register is to give up ownership, to license is to regulate a privilege.
Snowblindinfinity 1 year ago
that lawyer - is doing exactly what lawyers do best - telling ABSOLUTE BULLSHIT LIES.
every court case/judicial determination can be used as a precedent for future cases.
the guys just a dick.
336Torana 1 year ago 15
@336Torana EXACTLY! Why are lawyers going to give you the ammo you need, so that you don't feel you need them any longer?
1975hades 1 year ago 2
Good going Donald Sullivan!!! Thanks for standing up for Liberty!
secretsaregood 1 year ago
get at the end is an idiot. if it's granted to you it's not a right it's a privilege!! And if you regulate something so heavily you are essentially banning anyone who doesn't want to go through the awesome process of the DMV. I agree with this guy I'm sick of the government acting like it's my sovereign! I fail to see it's legitimacy to tell me to do stupid shit like get a license for this and that
collapseofthedollar 1 year ago
One of the problems this horses ass lawyer has is understanding that the STATE is a FICTION and doesn't exist except in demented minds like his. He lives in OZ and believes the WIZARD floating over his head is REAL. PEOPLE that are AGENTS of the "state" are who we are dealing with. THEY are the PSYCHOPATHS in control at this time and are willing to ROB, RAPE and PLUNDER the NORMAL people in the name of "Government". The Constitution doesn't give any rights. If there was none you could travel.
courageouslion 1 year ago
I've actually met this man. Weird seeing him on YT.
luvscats69 1 year ago
The "STATE" is a municipal corporation and CANNOT regulate travel, as a coporation cannot own the public highways, set boundaries, or territorialize them. The states, and the legal mafia community do not want to lose one of their biggest cash cows, because this is what licenses, plates, etc. are all about.
Dannymorisco 2 years ago
first thing you do if you do get to the court process is state that you claim common law jurisdiction. don't EVER EVER EVER hire a lawyer unless you want him to take your rights away. then tell the judge or whoever that you DO NOT CONSENT and WAIVE THE BENEFIT. case dismissed,
wachman 2 years ago
@wachman
Just showing up to court and answering the charge, is cause for them to govern you under their jurisdiction (he who answers to a name, is that name). The object is to lawfully refrain from even showing up in court. Research "common law abatement" Its a pretrial filing/ request to correct defects of process, and that when corrected you will lawfully appear, i.e. "name in all CAPs"
Courts=Las Vegas, If you cant afford to lose, don't play
gmcmudder1 1 year ago
that lawyer dude is scared if this movement grows his billing hours will drop like a hot potato
mike6459 2 years ago
they cant regulate anything unless you allow them to.
Xen5s 2 years ago
the lawyer is a buffoon... NO ONE can stop you from exercising your common law rights!!! America is under the common law jurisdiction... this case was NOT exceptional I know many who have done it and everyone can do it, you just have to inform yourself instead of letting the media trick you.+
giuseppegeracitano 2 years ago
U.S. Code Title 18>Part 1>Chapter 2>31
Right to travel.
When you get a license, you give up your right to travel and get "privledges" such as police, registration,license,etc.
I don't know about ya'll, but the right to travel has been in the constitution since the begninning, and i haven't had a license in 20 years. 15 court dates later, i am still driving, and won every single court appearance due to my constitutional rights as a US citizen. Fuck the Nazi propaganda and fuck the police.
MrMaryJanes 2 years ago 36
"Right to travel."
HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH OPERATING A MOTOR VEHICLE.... YOU LOSE.
greywolf424 2 years ago
@Greywolf424
Actually, it does.
MrMaryJanes 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"Actually, it does. "
NO IT DOESN'T.
greywolf424 2 years ago
"Actually, it does. "
YOU CAN TRAVEL WITHOUT A MOTOR VEHICLE.... THEREFORE YOU DO NOT NEED ONE TO TRAVEL.
greywolf424 2 years ago
@MrMaryJanes yes but as a US Citizen you only have Privileges not rights according the the 14th amendment therefore the right to travel does not apply to "US Citizens"
NYredwhiteandblue 1 year ago
I'm not being a jerk, but your descriptions need refining, because words & descriptions matter in court.
1) The common law right to travel, predates the constitution. The constitution does NOT bestow rights to men, it simply reiterates the fact that those already established unalienable rights are not to be hindered.
2) "my constitutional rights as a US citizen" = 14th amendment rights, and if studied you will discover that those are in fact benefit privileges that can be taken away.
gmcmudder1 1 year ago
@MrMaryJanes
Do you know what a "U.S. Citizen is? Apparently not. If you kne