LOL sure, aiding and abetting is something I wanna keep OFF my resumee so sorry, you gotta imagine that there's a good chance this is a lazy RCMP officer with a simple plan to catch a few idiots And with the whole 'war on terror' thing I imagine good fake IDs are even more of a 'watched' phenomenon. Don't need no DHS coming down on me like #juan said good luck, I suppose EDIT DAMN you scott free and damn my slow fingers, made it look like I just missed yer post and thought I was bein original, good show sir. It is certainly illegal to obtain a peice of Government-issued identification which has been altered or created as a replica to the original; however if you are looking for a Novelty ID, I know there was some store on Yonge Street near Grosvenor where you go downstairs which sold them -- mostly with themes like 'California' or 'New York'. This was atleast 10 years ago, so I don't know if the place exists anymore. It is against the rules of this forum to provide information on breaking the law.

Learn the truth about how to drive without a license. What's the difference between driving & traveling? What do you say to a cop when stopped? We are a team of professionals with years of experience in the manufacture of fake passports and other identity documents, best quality manufacturers of fake documents. With several million documents in circulation worldwide. We offer only original high qualities of a true-false passport, driving license, Stamps, ID cards.

So there's nobody here which can assist you in obtaining an altered or fake Ontario Drivers License if that's what you're after. Quote: Originally Posted by Andem It is certainly illegal to obtain a peice of Government-issued identification which has been altered or created as a replica to the original; however if you are looking for a Novelty ID, I know there was some store on Yonge Street near Grosvenor where you go downstairs which sold them -- mostly with themes like 'California' or 'New York'. This was atleast 10 years ago, so I don't know if the place exists anymore. It is against the rules of this forum to provide information on breaking the law. So there's nobody here which can assist you in obtaining an altered or fake Ontario Drivers License if that's what you're after.And if a person did, they would probably end up on the fast track to being 'Timed Out'. Quote: Originally Posted by shadowshiv I don't think that this would be a cop as this would constitute entrapment wouldn't it?

That being said, like I would ever try and help someone commit an illegal act. Especially online where it can be documented for everyone(the police in particular) to see. There are no laws for terrorists. That's who this guy is after. They're everywhere hurting everyone all the time. We must be vigilant and participate in the WAR on TERROR, OOOO Scary. Besides cops can lie and it's legal.

Likewise it is also legal to lie to a cop.

Learn the truth about how to drive without a license. You have a fundamental and inherent right to travel, just as you have the right to breathe or eat. How to drive without a license is an aspect of sovereignty that many people want to learn. Can you legally drive without a license?

What is the difference between driving and traveling? Is driving a right or a privilege? What do you say to the policeman if you are stopped? How can you best handle unconstitutional checkpoints? These are all important questions which we will explore here; if you want to know how to drive without a license, you’ll need to thoroughly master the concepts behind them. Can you Legally Drive Without a License? In short, yes – but technically you are traveling not driving (see below).

However, just because you have a right to do something (in this case the right to travel), it does not mean you’ll never be hassled, intimidated, charged or even temporarily thrown in prison. Rights must be constantly asserted and defended, especially in the face of a growing police state such as the one in which we are now living. That means you need to be prepared to defend yourself.

It’s not for everyone, but such is price paid by those who defend liberty and know how to drive without a license successfully. How to drive without a license depends on how well you know and assert your rights.

What is the Difference between Driving and Traveling? This might appear to be semantics or splitting hairs, but it’s not. The whole issue of how to drive without a license boils down to this. In everyday common English, to travel by means of a car, and to drive, are identical. However, one of the biggest cons of the is the fact that they have their own language ( legalese) which appears to be English but which has different definitions for some key terms.

In this case, as defined by legalese, “to drive” is to go on the roads by a motorized conveyance doing business or being engaged in commerce, and it is a privilege. “To travel”, on the other hand, is a right, and no legislation can be passed to strip you of your fundamental, inherent rights. To state you are “driving” is to unwittingly place yourself in admiralty or commercial jurisdiction. As a sovereign being, you never need surrender your rights and exchange them for privileges.

This is the way societies descend into tyranny. To exchange a right for a privilege is to ask permission for something (in the form of a governmental permit or license) that you are free to do anyway. Is Driving a Right or a Privilege? Driving is a privilege; traveling is a right. A privilege is granted by some authority, and equally it can be taken away by some authority.

A right can never be abrogated. Our right to travel can never be stripped from us; it is as fundamental to our existence as our right to breathe. There is a lot of case law supporting the right to travel. The quotes below are just a tiny fraction of it. However, it is almost all law cases from admiralty or commercial jurisdiction, so it is not entirely relevant here.

What is the Case Law Supporting the Right to Travel? Judges have been ruling on this case for literally over 100 years in various levels of Courts.

Retired policeman Jack McLamb wrote a great citing some of the case law (below). (Please note however this is merely supporting evidence and not the final say, because of these cases were held in admiralty / maritime / commercial jurisdiction, and the secret to driving without a license is challenging this jurisdiction and having your case heard in a common law court.) CASE #1: “The use of the highway for the purpose of travel and transportation is not a mere privilege, but a common fundamental right of which the public and individuals cannot rightfully be deprived.” Chicago Motor Coach v. Psp 3000 Recovery Mode Download. Chicago, 169 NE 221.

CASE #2: “The right of the citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, either by carriage or by automobile, is not a mere privilege which a city may prohibit or permit at will, but a common law right which he has under the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” Thompson v. Smith, 154 SE 579. CASE #3: “The right to travel is a part of the liberty of which the citizen cannot be deprived without due process of law under the Fifth Amendment.” Kent v. Dulles, 357 US 116, 125. CASE #4: “The right to travel is a well-established common right that does not owe its existence to the federal government. It is recognized by the courts as a natural right.” Schactman v.

Dulles 96 App DC 287, 225 F2d 938, at 941. For further information including case law on how to drive without a license, I suggest reading the magnificent sovereignty guide by Johnny Liberty “” and watching this in-depth.

The DVD is also very useful, inspiring and features people who know from firsthand experience about how to drive without a license successfully. What Do You Say to the Policeman if You are Stopped? The best way to handle peace officers, law enforcements officers or policemen is as sovereign, freeman-on-the-land Dean Clifford does in the video above. Politely and courteously state your rights; know the law and quote cases if need be; display the confidence that you know how to drive without a license, and that it is perfectly lawful; refuse to be intimidated; and most of all, be prepared to have a long conversation with the initial person’s superiors. Most cops are completely unaware that they are enforcing commercial statutes in, and that you can exercise your right to remain in common law jurisdiction. Admiralty jurisdictions uses administrative rules, regulations, code, statutes, policy and bylaws – all of which are not real “law” but operate under the color of law. If you are traveling privately and not engaged in business on the roads, you are not under commercial jurisdiction and do not need a license.

You’d be surprised how many police officers know about the right to travel, and will honor it if you confidently assert your rights. How Can I Best Handle Unconstitutional Checkpoints?

This compilation “” features some great firsthand examples. Ask the law enforcement officer if they are detaining you (“Are you detaining me or am I free to go?”); if they say they are detaining you, state that they only have 2 legal reasons for doing so: your consent or reasonable suspicion based on probable cause. World Regional Geography Global Patterns Local Lives 5th Edition Ebook. State that they do not have your consent, so therefore they must produce probable cause, else they are illegally detaining you. Ask them for evidence of probable cause; if they have none, ask them again, politely but repeatedly, if you are free to go. If you have more questions about how to drive without a license, and others matters relating to freedom, you can call Tools For Freedom at 800-770-8802 x1, leave your name and number, and we’ll be happy to send you out a free print catalog full of freedom and sovereignty resources.

***** Want to keep informed on the latest and greatest news and analysis on the New World Order, Natural Health, Sovereignty and more? Makia Freeman is the editor of and senior researcher at, writing on many aspects of truth and freedom, from exposing aspects of the global conspiracy to suggesting solutions for how humanity can create a new system of peace and abundance. Sources: *https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V9kVCQ0y5Ec. I’m having trouble understanding how this works in a practical situation, I live in New Jersey and my driver’s license is suspended for a long time. I’ve always been very independent as I’m single and have no immediate family, just a few friends who try to help me out when they can. I live in an area with no public transportation, which means not only am I prevented from working and earning a living because I have no way to get to a job but also enjoying most of the freedoms that traveling allows including simple things like going to the supermarket or even necessary appointments i.e. Doctor and dentist visits.

I feel like I’m on house arrest and am so bored and tired of feeling depressed but if I invoke the right to travel as a valid reason why I should be able to drive, I still can’t get auto insurance because I can’t register my car so I’m also unable to get insurance. This means that I would not only be charged with driving on the suspended list but also no registration or insurance and I would definitely be arrested and get jail time, which would absolutely ensure that I would become homeless in the process. Is it enough to merely cite these things to an officer to avoid more tickets, fines and jail time or would I still be charged and arrested? Please advise, I could really use some legitimate feedback on how to proceed and I don’t want to end up worse off than I am now.

I’m not a young person and I’d like to have my freedom back. I think this may help many ppl with the same question as you have: Eddie Craig, former police officer that now educates the public about this exact subject. He even has a script written up to follow should you be pulled over by the “authorities” in regards to your traveling. Its not about getting rude or citing law to the officer(s), but about recording the encounter and exercising your fifth amendment right against self incrimination. The script helps you to know what to say and HOW to say it so that, should you get a ticket of ANY sort, you can fight it in court AND WIN!!! Give nothing, defend your rights and good luck! Because you fell into the trap with the issue of driving lic.

You also created a prison without walls allowing the system to mess around with you. In PA some judges did go along with the issue of driving with out a lic. Most cop know nothing about it (drones for the system )the lawyer chosen not to deal with it because his job depends on it The courts are not constitutional court and therefore does not want to hear the issue on the driving without a lic. Umtil we get our constitutional country back nothing will change. I would like information on the right to travel in the state of Oregon I had a great driving record 25 years no tickets then bought a car that the sell was a scam lost my license because I drove it anyway after having trouble and unable to tag it therefore I didnt insure it the tickets were horrendous and I have never gotten nor do I want a state license again I just got pulled over again bought a car a couple months ago tags just expired so a ton more tickets. Do I have to have insurance and tags is there any thing on this that protects us from state fines.

Thank you for your time. @Kimberly, I’m in Oregon and have a solid grasp on dragging them into a court of record and proceed according to common law when they exceed their jurisdiction. I’m in Clackamas County and proceed against them there or into federal district court if needed.

The issue is that their jurisdiction must be challenged on any statutory law ticket. There is some ground work to lay down and you will have issues with ignorant enforcement peace officers. Knowing and exercising your rights is important.

Learning them and why you have them is critical. Feel free to contact me if you wish. For future reference, probably won’t help you when you posted, but to others who experience this, REMEMBER THE FOLLOWING: No police officer can take your personal property without your consent or a legal warrant.

Your consent, passive or otherwise, allows them to take it. It is legal theft. ASK FOR THAT WARRANT!!!

When you agree to let them impound or tow your vehicle, you are granting passive consent. This is because you did not assert your right and request the warrant, which is needed to take your personal property. I have not had personal experience applying these principles in Australia, but I see no reason why they wouldn’t apply everywhere – at least in Western countries. They certainly work in Canada and the US. Humans are born with inherent, unalienable natural rights, no matter what Government says or what it codifies in its laws. I would appeal to cops/judges/bureaucrats at that deeper level, whenever communicating with them.

Ask them to disprove that you have a right to travel in writing, etc. Or else you will assume that it does exist. Usually they leave people alone who claim this right because they fear the publicity. I think this concept is goofy.

I’ve seen referenced court case that somehow are not hyperlinked. That is the first thing I notice in these pages of this type of site that is fishy. Next, each of these sites, this one included, makes a statement that the term “driver” has a legal definition of a person who is engaged in a work process. Yet they provide no case law reference that such a definition is factual in any jurisdiction. Clearly I should research it a little bit further if it means that much to me. At this point I just think I am looking at a bunch of junk science style legal “opinions” of uncredentialed people who shouldn’t be providing legal advise.

Good question. I see no reason why children and teenagers don’t have the same rights as adults; however, with a right comes the responsibility to use it and exercise it appropriately. Driving or operating a car or motor vehicle has serious consequences (such as accidentally killing others) if not done with care, precision and responsibility. Therefore, I would suggest you drive with adults for a long time until you have 3 independent adults who can attest to the fact that you can operate a vehicle safely. That being said, there’s no reason not to get a drivers’ license.

It’s a rite of passage and a good way to test yourself, to ensure you are truly safe. Then, once you have it, you can revoke it; or you can keep it and “travel” instead of “drive”. The point is not so much whether you have a drivers’ license; the point is what jurisdiction/capacity you were in at the time you are stopped by a cop. They will PRESUME you are in commercial jurisdiction and driving, but this is a PRESUMPTION of LAW, not a FACT of LAW.

You can assert that you are in common law jurisdiction and traveling, regardless of whether you happen to own a license or not. It’s all about which capacity you are acting in.

In New Mexico, my daughter managed to get something included in her coporate-state-issued driver’s license(which she knows she’s not required to have, but a little too afraid not to), the words “without prejudice” in her own hand above her signature. The commercial statute enforcers, i.e., “police”, in New Mexico seem to be aware of what this means, as, whenever she has an “encounter” with one of them, they either let her go or deliberately don’t show up in “court”(this happened when one “cop” didn’t notice the writing on her “license” at time of illegal detention). These “cops” seem to be aware that “without prejudice” or any other statement of reservation of rights with a signature(UCC1-207 or etc.), voids the commercial jurisdiction of the action. And there is no way they want this admitted on public record in their “courts”, so cop either lets her go or doesn’t dare show up on the “court date”(causing automatic dismissal). They can try but if you know how to defend yourself, no citation will be ably to stick to you, because to cite you for an alleged infraction, implies you have already agreed (through a contract like the State-issued drivers’ license) to follow all of their rules and regulations – which are commercial/corporate in nature. When you travel by right (instead of driving by privilege), you are not in the jurisdiction where you are bound by those regulations.

ToolsForFreedom.com has lots of great info on this in the section. It’s well worth educating yourself. Hi Makia, Thanks for all the great info. I am fighting my own licensing battle!! My driver’s license is currently on a one year suspension until I pay a fine of $600 by January 22, 2017 and they won’t reinstate until July 28th of 2017.

Why might you ask??? Because I didn’t pay my bogus tickets totaling $345.00 by their due date in January 25th of 2016. My license then was suspended for 5 days when I got pulled me over for not having a valid inspection sticker.

(expired in January) on a 4 year old regularly maintained vehicle that had 56000kms on it. I was in the process of trading to the dealership. I had to wait two weeks for the 2016 Honda civic (BEST CAR EVER) to arrive. I have no doubt that when I allow my suspended license and registration on the Honda to expire in Feb 2017, that I will get pulled over, my vehicle will be towed and I might get arrested (according to the threat on the documents) I come from the city life to a small town where my family resides so I could have a quieter, less stressful life. I am a good person, no criminal history. I own a small reputable business in town for the last 6 years and have helped create part time jobs in the summer months. I have volunteered time and money while supporting a charity which I held an Executive position for two years.

I am independent, not in a relationship and live on a single income, business is slow during the winter months. I’ve been pulled over maybe three times since I’ve been licensed in 1990.

I have lived in Alberta, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick. After moving here, I’ve been pulled over 4 times in the last five years!!! Twice by town bullies, twice by RCMP. One town bully cop in particular lied in court when I went to court to fight the two original bogus tickets What an awakening that was! I was really pissed about the entire thing! Was found guilty and fined!!

The other lied while he had me pulled over, he towed my car after I specifically told him I was leaving to have someone come get me and the car. He offered his phone, but I didn’t have my phone with me I had no numbers to call as I don’t have any memorized, I declined and said I didn’t have any numbers (like most people now-a-days) When I walked back from a friends house nearby to the cop and my car my car was already on the tow truck. This was in mid February of 2016 at 5:30pm. I was not at all dressed properly as I had just left work.

He drove off, left me standing on the side of the road, in tears, after the tow truck left. I waited about 20 minutes before my ride came. That’s a long time when it’s cold outside. What I learned is that he had no concern whatsoever for my personal safety or welfare!

I no longer have respect for the town police and after this experience I don’t trust them or the court system either. Education is the key. I believed paying for my house expenses and putting food in my fridge trumped paying the ticket fine a few days to a week later than the due date on a sold vehicle. I’ve had enough!

I will know how to fight back. Thanks to people like Rob Menard, Dean Clifford and yourself. I’ve learned so much. From now on, I will video record every police interaction I have. Looking forward to becoming a FREE WOMAN!!! It’s amazing how many people were brainwashed into believing that driving is a privilege.

The roads are paid for by the people, maintained by the people, and created by the people. Automobiles were paid for and built by the people. Therefore, the roads and vehicle’s belong to the people. Where in there does the government have to ability to just swoop in and say you need to ask them permission to drive on your roads that you built. The government cannot own anything, everything is the people’s. Making driving a privilege was just a way for government to monopolize the road ways and make it a cash cow for extorting money from citizens.

If driving wasn’t a privilege they couldn’t put up roadblocks, tollways, have drivers license fees, registration fees, city sticker fees, license plate renewal fees.etc. And let’s not forgot about all the tickets fines and lawyer fees that go along with all that in the courts. People need to stand up and say enough is enough. The constitution was created to limit power of the government because they knew governments always begin to become tyrannical at some point.

Good question. I have heard of cases of some people successfully refusing to register and insure their vehicle, although with registration, you would be driving around with no plates, and you’re an easy target for cops. It would be very difficult to have them accept that. However, ultimately the issue of registration/insurance is a different issue to that of driving/traveling, because it’s all about capacity. You can drive or travel with the same vehicle and do each one at different times. There are some who claim that registration inherently means signing over ownership of the item (e.g.

Vehicle) to the entity that is registering it, however Dean Clifford disputes that. I am still researching the truth of that and have not gotten to the bottom of it.

I’ve been looking into this quite a bit lately and reading a lot about people who have gotten pulled over with expired plates, licenses, and lapsed insurance, and are now asking how to get out of the tickets. I think the main problem is that once you have any of these things, it is proof positive you are a driver. From what I’ve been reading, and what I’ll be practicing as soon as my certificate of origin comes for my motorcycle is this; do not provide evidence to the police. You have not committed a crime. Although you may think of an officer as a “public servant”, their job from the first moment of encounter with you is to build a case against you.

They will examine you, interrogate you, and if you are cooperative, will get a confession from you without ever having to lift a finger. When you get pulled over, you cannot say you were “just driving to work because I have to feed my kids” or “the insurance just expired two days ago”. You should be saying nothing but; * “Am I being detained, or am I free to go?” * If you are being detained – “I am exercising my 5th amendment right under the Constitution and will not be answering any questions and I am exercising my 4th amendment right under the Constitution and do not consent to a search of my person or belongings.” There are many people who are being arrested for having false identification, forged documents, and other things to make them look legitimate, but they are just providing ammunition against themselves. Give them nothing.

No plates, no insurance card, no passport, no credit cards, no last name. You’re attempting to convince them you are not part of the establishment, but supplying evidence to the contrary.

Thanks for your comment. I have heard of some people having success with getting the “certificate of origin” for their vehicle.

Your approach is certainly one of many possible sovereign/free man approaches. It doesn’t suit everyone, but I admire your bravery and commitment to the principle of the matter. Whoever uses this approach, however, needs to be prepared for the possibility they will get pushed around and maybe thrown in jail a few times. I still maintain, however, that it’s all about capacity and the burden of proof is on them to PROVE you were driving rather than PRESUMING it.

Factual proof will always trump presumptions of law and it’s virtually impossible for them to prove such a thing. I am on here because I seen a man tonight at a event his plate says FREEMAN. I asked him about it and he told me to start researching the constitutional right the right to travel and know what it all means.

He has a suspended license and has been pulled over 3 times since he has this plate. He must really have this down packed because they let him go. I lost my license in 2002 and actually this week I have a hearing to try and ask for it back. But now that I have seen this, I dont know if I even want to do that. Since it is my right I should stand up for liberty.

I only have a few days to decide, be like everyone else and play along with these color of laws or protect my rights. This is a hard one, kinda. I am looking to find that plate and print off that paper you suggested carrying.

I wish I would have known this before. And also he does NOT pay for insurance either. Thanks for the info here. I think I will be calling for the catalog as well. I’m not trying to convince you to take this path. It’s a hard one, and it’s not for everyone. Information is information.

Do with it what you will. There are two fundamental truths here: 1.

The right to travel is a basic, unalienable human right, just as the right to exist, the right to breathe or the right to eat is; 2. Driving is a privilege (regulated under commercial/maritime jurisdiction) and traveling is a right which cannot, be definition, be regulated.

I quoted some case law to show how judges from all kinds of courts have upheld this right. I have also personally used this knowledge to successfully overturn fees and fines. Do with the knowledge what you will. You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make him drink it. As with my previous comment, this path is not for everyone. It is easier to just get a license.

However, collectively, the less we stand up for rights and accept the Government turning them into privileges, the more we become enslaved, year by year. What kind of world do you want to leave behind for future generations? Freedom requires knowledge, vigilance and courage.

It has to be enforced by the public. It’s not going to just happen automatically. Without standing up for your rights or freedom, they will slowly disappear. I have court tomorrow for knowingly traveling on a suspended driver’s license. I was wondering if I could use this article in my defense.

Under the circumstances, I was being a designated driver. My passenger, of whom is un-licensed; was intoxicated. I was not traveling erratically. When stopped, due to being unfamiliar with the new road pattern newly constructed, I was sitting on the “wrong side of the road”.

The way the road was constructed it looked as if at this particular light – right lane turns right, left lane turns left. I was in the left lane waiting for the light to change. The light also is not clearly viewable as you are sitting in the right lane. I do plan to pay the fines to obtain my legal ID back (if I must). However, if found that my ID was confiscated without legal prudence, then I’d like to contest the charges and defend myself.

Thank you State of Florida, U.S.A. This is an interesting concept but seems pretty useless considering I’m not sure how tyrannical licensing drivers is. I think we can all agree the process to get one is pretty necessary, and once you have it for the most part you don’t have to think about it. The whole point is to ensure the driver is capable of operating a motor vehicle somewhat responsibly, is that really something you think most people should be jumping through legal loopholes to avert? Maybe I’m missing something, but it seems like some people are so eager to feel constitutionally empowered they forget what they’re arguing against is actually pretty reasonable. All it amounts to is a legal pissing contest with some asshole cop who’s doing his job, but you’re giving him a hard time just because you can. Thanks for your comment.

I do agree that safety is of paramount importance when operating motor vehicles. It’s too dangerous to have people using them without first getting to a high standard. So, I see part of the need why we have a licensing system. However, the problem with the system is that it curbs your rights, makes you liable for silly “infringements” or “infractions”, puts you into the revenue extraction scheme (red light/speeding/seat belt citations) and puts you under the Government’s jurisdiction again. I refuse to be part of the Government’s nefarious schemes to control and make money off the citizenry they are supposedly there to serve and protect. For the overwhelming majority of people, we know how to drive. After you have gone through the testing process, you don’t need any more testing.

Why beg or ask the Government permission for something you can do naturally, anyway, such as traveling? That puts you in the position of being a subject, servant or slave. The more people do that, the more we give power to an entity that was only ever intended to be small, limited and decentralized – not the sprawling monstrosity it has become.

Thank you for the response. Being accountable for making driving errors that could potentially end lives or cause property damage doesn’t exactly equate to an infringement of rights. I’m not really sure what’s silly about any of the infractions you stated. All of those things have very clear and evident safety reasons for being enforced, even if they may sometimes seem frivolous.

Furthermore they’re really easy to avoid along with “revenue extraction” or being under specific jurisdiction as you say. The government may be making money off of traffic violations, but that money also happens to be powerful incentive to impose imperative safety regulations. Any other reason is highly speculative.

“After you have gone through the testing process, you don’t need any more testing.” Exactly, once you’ve passed the test, buckle your seat belt and keep it under 55 (or whatever), the government doesn’t care what you’re doing behind the wheel. You’re not “asking permission” you’re entering into a mutual agreement based on your desire to get from A to B and their desire to not see you plow into the side of some minivan because you ran a red light. I’m not sure how you draw such a straight line from “man, drivers licenses are a bummer” to shackles and chains but it’s impressive rhetoric. Also, if you really want to talk about travel, driving is only one of many forms of doing so and also happens to be one of the most accessible, dangerous, and therefore regulated. Do you really believe those things aren’t correlated precisely to each other and not the scheme of a “nefarious” government?

If you’re coming to this topic cold, the traveling vs. Driving distinction may seem like exaggerated “rhetoric”, but in the overall scheme of things – as you can see by my work on The Freedom Articles and also on Tools For Freedom – it’s part of a grander conspiracy to transform the status of the masses from master (creator of Government) to slave (dominated by Government). This is just one more area where excessive regulation dominates. It is entirely possible to be responsible and accountable without needing laws, rules or excessive regulation. Something is really wrong when the Government is actually incentivized to trick and catch people on the roads to try to underhandedly get money from them.

Furthermore, many of the “infractions” (e.g. Not wearing your own seat belt, driving 5-10 miles more than the speed limit, etc.) are not necessarily dangerous to others.

Government always uses the excuse of “safety” to further its centralization of control – just look at the crimes committed by tyrants who claimed they wanted to bring “peace, order and security” to their nation (e.g. Hitler) or hide secrets from the public under the rubric of national security. “Exactly, once you’ve passed the test, buckle your seat belt and keep it under 55 (or whatever), the government doesn’t care what you’re doing behind the wheel.” Yes it does – it insists you carry a valid license or else it revokes your privilege of driving. That’s the whole point. Why should Government have so much power it can revoke what is really a right? The Founding Fathers set things up so that rights were unalienable and could not be regulated but it takes an aware and educated populace to know and enforce that.

I am fairly new to the concept of our right to travel. While reading the conversation between you and Andy I fell there is something left out. In my readings I have come to the understanding that we have a right to travel that cannot be restricted by any law (i.e. License) as long as we are not being employed as a driver (i.e.

Taxi driver). However, correct me if I’m wrong, I believe you can impose safety measures like speed limits and stop lights for public interest. That being said they cannot stop you from traveling on the road but can cite you for doing so unsafely.

The more I read about the right to travel, the more I agree with it. But I still believe we need these safety measures or else traveling will become far more dangerous than it already is. Thanks for your comment. You make a fair point. When a Government imposes restrictions based on a genuine care for the safety and security of the public, I think most people are fine with that and would readily accept it.

However, I believe most people have an inherent idea of safety and common sense, and it is questionable how much we need a Government to step in and regulate these things. The problem arises when power-hungry leaders gain control of the political apparatus and use the excuse of “public safety” and “national security” ad nauseam to control people.

That is the atmosphere in which we live – an out of control Government and military-intelligence-industrial-complex that gets away with anything by using the trite excuse of national security. So you really think that buckling your seat belt should be regulated be the government? You think the government cares if something happens to you behind the wheel or not?

Like a police officer friend of mine told me, all these little frivolous laws like no seat belt, one headlight out, air freshener hanging, are only there to be used as probable cause to pull you over in the first place. Once stopped, the “real investigation” begins. Last week, the Texas U.S Circuit of appeals just deemed that police have the right to pull you over for air fresheners, rosaries, and pro police stickers because they’re deemed to be accompanied with suspicious activity. It’s crazy how many people will always let their rights be trampled on because the government tells them they need to keep them safe. Instead of enacting all these frivolous laws based on what might’ve happened, harsher laws should possibly be made for someone causing property/ bodily injury to somebody while exercising their rights, if deemed they were being irresponsible. I guess, even though it’s happened all throughout history, government’s always become tyrannical at some point, but even with a document that’s written to protect the people from it, people will always want to oppress themselves anyway and still call it freedom. Seems people want to be ruled and told what they can or can’t do, instead of actually taking responsibility for themselves.

“For the overwhelming majority of people, we know how to drive” Allow me to laugh long and hard. Ahah ah aha a hah a ha haha ah ah a So now please do educate us how government shills, in collusion with Big Insurance, patrol the streets, forcing people to run traffic lights, text spam to distract the real true experts driving well within the speed limit, hand how virtually no insurance claims are really filed, beings how virtually everyone is a good driver” Sure, the people of Abuja, Nigeria, know how to drive, too. They just disregard all traffic law and signs. No lights, no brakes, no insurance, four people crammed on a moped yeah, they got it all figured out We must fight for our right to do whatever, too. Nobody is saying that you shouldn’t have to prove you’re able to drive a vehicle. The point is, it isn’t the government’s job to baby sit and be in control of who’s responsible or not. To assume that you need a driver’s license, just assumes that everybody is automatically irresponsible.

Part of having your rights and freedoms means people have to take responsibility for themselves. When you give away a right for exchange of a privilege, the government will always abuse it. Some states automatically suspend your license for speeding through a school zone. I bet you almost everybody who ever gets caught speeding, don’t know they are even in a school zone.

So how is it fair for somebody to lose their right to travel to work because of a victimless crime. I also believe in Virginia, they were trying to make it illegal to get your license if you had a failing grade in high school. The government did not build the roads, it was bought and paid for by the people.

People are so eager to give away their liberties for the promise of safety from the government. Truth is, licensing is only required because it’s a cash cow for the state. You really think the government gives a damn if you’re safe on the roads or not? Governments plan their budgets on you not being safe (writing tickets), so therefore, it’d be contradiction of their interest. The government isn’t “babysitting” anything, it’s not as if there’s a cop sitting in your back seat every time you get behind the wheel.

They’re enforcing a very reasonable set of restrictions that happens to include a license, which is very simple to earn and maintain provided the driver is not totally negligent. The government’s assumption you need a drivers license is due to the fact that you weren’t born knowing how to physically or mentally operate a motor vehicle, and therefore should have to be tested on those abilities before you’re granted one. Responsibility doesn’t even really enter into the equation except as a lecture from your parents. “Part of having your rights and freedoms means people have to take responsibility for themselves.” Rights and freedoms have nothing to do with whether you know how to properly signal a lane change or not.

“When you give away a right for exchange of a privilege, the government will always abuse it.” Not even sure what that means but either way it’s highly rhetorical. To me abuse is like, a parent hitting their kid or something, what are you talking about? “Some states automatically suspend your license for speeding through a school zone. I bet you almost everybody who ever gets caught speeding, don’t know they are even in a school zone.” Pesky school kids, rum ’em over I say!

I’ve never once had a problem understanding whether I was in a school zone or not. Yellow sign, speed limitation, often times flashing lights or even a speed trap. What’s the confusion? The penalty is fair because dead children are sort of a liability I guess. The law doesn’t always deal in the identification of a “victim,” often times it involves preventive measures which, like it or not happen to keep people from dying or being injured.

No the government did not single-handedly build or pay for the roads, but they did delegate the people who did and also organized and dispersed the funds to do so. Just like Steve Jobs didn’t build Apple he made it possible for others to do so.

“People are so eager to give away their liberties for the promise of safety from the government.” Again, what’s with the extraneous rhetoric? How do you go from a driver’s license requirement to “the British are coming.” “Truth is, licensing is only required because it’s a cash cow for the state.” I don’t even know how much a license cost these days but I don’t seem to remember the price being anything out of hand.

How does that even enter into cash cow territory? Seems like it would just go back into the overhead of their shitty employees. “You really think the government gives a damn if you’re safe on the roads or not?” Yeah I do. Believe it or not, all of the people’s jobs in government positions whether they may be local or otherwise are contingent upon results i.e.

People’s lives, property damage, etc. Yes, governments plan their budgets around taxation, and tickets happen to sort of fall under that category. It’s sort of like cigarette smoking. No one gets excited when people die of lung cancer, but fools are going to do it anyway so you might as well make a little money off it and possibly turn a few people off in the process. You’re the one thats brainwashed.

If you believe anything written on this website you’re brainswashed. That is the sad truth of it, you may not like it, you may not believe it, but these freeman, sovereign citizens, got into your head and brainwashed you. That’s what brainwash means, someone or something, made you believe in something completely false. You can argue your “god given right” and shit, but driving and traveling and completely unrelated things. To operate (sit in driver’s seat and steer) a vehicle (a big box with 4 wheels that you sit it, I’ll keep it simple for you) on any public roads is not the same as being able to travel, which is the free movement between states. Traveling has nothing to do with driving.

How many people you know that got a license to drive and can’t The driving test ain’t even hard my son is twelve and I know he can pass it my parents taught me to drive it’s our responsibility to teach our children some don’t. But how dose a road block protect me from people who can’t drive they suppend them for child support how do I get to work if I can’t drive I’m in Douglasville ga there are no buses if I can’t get to work I can’t pay anything yes some people will always abuse rights but what about abusing authority.

I’ve had my license before. Pulled over for a headlight out four years ago, didn’t have insurance because I was 20, living paycheck to paycheck already and couldn’t afford any more bills. I got a $550 ticket for not having it. I’ve still never been able to pay for this because living check to check hasn’t changed. Because this went unpaid my license was suspended and I’ve been stopped 5 times since then, each ticket amounting to more and more. Each time I was stopped was for either a head/tail light being out or having expired tabs or no valid insurance and driving without a valid license. They’ve got me owing them around $5500 now before I can even renew my license and I’m still not making enough money to even eat three meals a day, let alone start paying fines that I don’t feel are fundamentally right.

This article isn’t to encourage people to not go through the proper testing and training (I did drivers ed and I am an extremely safe traveler), it’s for people who have been bullied into owing money they’ll never have to the government so we can still be able to get to work and actually know our rights in doing so. If you really think about what I’ve told you, I owe over $5000 to the government simply for having a headlight out four years ago. That is not right in any way, and up until reading this article I had no idea I could have contested these.

Hey this was very informative to me, one question I am 17 currently living on my own, I have been for 3 years now and also have no way of getting my license because I cannot get parental consent. If I were to (travel) would it be considered an illegal offense seeing how I am a minor? I need a way to get to work I have a vehicle but am scared to drive-(travel) without a license. My work is literally 2 minutes driving from my house. I do as minimal driving as possible to get away from being caught but the day is going to come eventually I know it.

Please help me and inform me of this! Great article and great discussion. I come at this from a non-US (Australian) perspective. I wonder if in a country where it is considered a right (not a privilege) to bear arms, it becomes very hard to argue that it is not also a right to drive a car. Both pursuits are potentially lethal. It seems US citizens will accept the price in gun violence in order to maintain their gun rights.

Maybe US citizens should also accept the price in road fatalities that will come from not regulating who can drive. On an ultimate level, the inherent rights of every human are universal and not dependent on which country you happen to inhabit. I discussed this concept further here: Society accepts a certain of risk in exchange for freedom. We all know there is a chance we could die every time we step into a car or fly on a plane, but we assess the risk to be low enough that we are willing to take that chance in order for increased mobility, opportunity, freedom and convenience. This goes for guns too – although stats show that nations with tighter gun control than the US (like the UK) actually have higher murder rates, because people are less likely to be armed in self-defense (). The question here is this: is there a connection between a lower rate of road fatalities and Government-regulated drivers’ licenses? There is in the area of revoking licenses of those who drink alcohol and drive (although these people are the irresponsible statistical outliers).

But outside of that, I doubt there is a significant connection. Meanwhile, the licensing system has become a devious means to set up a control grid to entrap people in revenue extraction schemes which have everything to do with stealing money from citizens – and nothing to do with safety, although it is a noble-sounding pretext for government-sanctioned robbery. Like many people have said here, taking a driver’s license test DOES NOT create safe or even safer drivers. I know people who passed their drivers test, pulled out of the lot and promptly caused accidents! The ONLY way humans really learn anything is, by doing it, Hands-on. To those of us (myself included) that are facing traffic & criminal court dates because of past run-ins with the Traffic Nazi’s, remember that freedom is something to fight for. We all get nervous going before the leviathan of government but, remember, the Courts are The Servant, WE ARE THE PEOPLE!!

The Courts serve US, not the other way around! Now, GO FORWARD & SERVE ON THE FRONT LINES OF FREEDOM AS A FREEMAN!! Ya the joke is you can speed / drive without a licence till you get caught!?!?! Like anything else you are right that it can be different breaking the law at 17 (minor) than breaking it as an adult (but the judge can try you as “an adult” as we see from time to time! That said its not the driving that’s the issue here, its driving without insurance who knows what happens if you get in an accident without insurance (and you are at fault) do without the car or if its only two minutes away bike for now!!! I have to agree with you. Your articles here are right.

I live in Pennsylvania and I never got a license in my life. I was pulled over for traveling 5 times in my life. It’s all a money scheme for courts and government. Each time I get pulled over they tack another year on my suspension. Now how can they suspend a license I never had? Please send me a link I can print of to keep in my vehicle while I’m traveling to show the next officer that I have the right to travel.

Thanks for your information! Great article, but I have to wonder: where have you traveled?

The globe is covered with armed nazi checkpoints. I know “papers please” in a few languages. My daughter at age 0 was almost kept from her mother (only allowed to remain after extensive costs) because “visa not approved” when we traveled to: the UK.

This is as spoiled middle class academics mind you. I know plenty who are separated from their families for decades because travel (not driving mind you) is universally considered valid control of fascist state. Right now millions of people are unable to go where they need to for work and family. Thousands are in tears at this moment. And yet people still talk of “enforcing immigration” by preventing travel. Yes, we have the “right to travel” as you say but right now not a single established legal system in the world honors this right, and every one of them honors the right of uniformed fascists to prevent you from traveling!!!

Garry Davis RIP had the right idea. Anyway, keep up the good work I will return to read your column.

My license is currently suspended after being involved in a car accident. I am also a person with a disability, whose civil rights were violated by the police and state. Unfortunately, I hired what I thought was competent representation, however, I was provided no defense. I am unable to get a restricted drivers license, as the charge of leaving the scene disqualifys me. Even though my life was threatened with a gun, which is what resulted in me leaving, and I was forced to plead guilty to avoid jail, according to my “attorney.” I would only need to drive my car to get to and from work, as I live and work in the suburbs, where public transportation is not readily available. Is there any way around this, so I am able to “travel” to work?

What if I’m on parole and get pulled over for no license? Will that legally result in breaking the conditions of parole? We’ve reached out to my state governors office, who unfortunately has no jurisdiction with the PA DOT, so they were unable to provide me with any help. Any advice or help would be greatly appreciated. Thank you so much! The laws are generally written to apply to “US persons”, meaning citizens and permanent residents. Coming in on a visa necessarily means you have contracted with the US Government and agreed to abide by all its laws, so it’s going to be harder to assert the right to travel.

If you choose this, I would expect there to be more resistance from cops and judges than with an average American. However, on an ultimate level, the right to travel is a universal human right, regardless of where you live, as I wrote about here. Love this blog and am ALL about standing up for my rights! I’m tired of everyone allowing the government to control EVERYTHING about us.

I’m not here to argue with any of you who are more than happy to continue allowing this to happen, I’m solely here because I’ve been following these blogs for AWHILE now. Yes, they check out and have very supportive FACTS!

I, unfortunately, have been fighting with the state of Illinois for eight years now. Yes, I traveled while intoxicated one time when I was 17.

Four years and eight months later I was pulled over after helping a friend move. We stopped at a bar and he wanted to buy me a couple drinks for helping.

I refused as I had work very early the next morning. I eventually ended up having ALMOST 3 beers and had a cop waiting for my truck to leave the bar.

I made a bad name for myself when I was younger and take full responsibility for it. I changed after serving hard time which this was after that. I misconstrued the law and thought it was OK to travel after a couple beers and yea, definitely did not account for the ZERO tolerance. Whatever, once again I paid my dues and here I am eight and a half years later still fighting for my license! I’ve dumped I don’t even know how much money into this. I seriously want to just give up on tryin to travel myself, but then there’s this.

My spirits are lifted, again. My dilemma is, Yea I have a right to travel freely. What about when I’m revoked?

And now I DO have a great job opportunity as a linesman apprentice. They work on power lines, which as we all know requires traveling throughout the state or counties really.

Is there a way to get this joke of a system under control so I can get my CDL for work?? How can I lose my opportunity to profit from the road if I have never been able to profit from using the road? I mean technically I lost somethin that never existed, correct?

On another note, if you do return your ID back to the DMV and revoke your contract (which obviously they NEVER tell you you’re doing) how do you go about buying a car, house, smokes, or anything that requires your picture ID showing you and your age? Is that where your passport comes into play, and if so, what if someone were on legal papers (parole, probation, etc) and can’t get a passport?

I’m all for doing this to the fullest, but I also want to make sure I can still live my life as needed while doing so. Public transportation is not around for me and I’ve LITERALLY walked over USVI mountains to get to work.

But my body can’t take the abuse anymore and am on workman’s comp as I speak. I just want to go through life living the way we were meant to, and be on my pursuit of happiness.

Can you give insight on this Makia, or is this state, as all lawyers have called this state, the “nightmare state” gonna hinder me from that always? Pleeeeaaaase help. Thanks for your comment.

It’s saddening to hear stories such as this. Unfortunately I don’t see an easy solution. You can try traveling not driving, but if your job requires a license, it’s going to be difficult to get around that.

In your case it may be better to try to get a State-issued license. You can use other ID like a passport or State ID card in situations that require a picture ID. I would suggest contacting the authorities and seeing what you have to do to get another driver’s license – or getting one in another county, state or even country if you can. Great discussion!! Ok, so as a Canadian, I’m understanding that all humans have the inalienable right to travel, regardless of country of residence. I’m curious if you know what laws I need to familiarize myself with in order to travel (albeit temporarily) with an accidentally expired license??

I didn’t even know it was expired – it only expired over the long weekend. And now to my amazement, upon reading the MTO website, I have been informed that they desire to make me start my license process all over again, pay all previously paid fees again, then pay to renew the license, then pay to renew the plates, then pay to renew insurance. It is for these reasons that I completely detest the tyranny of our governments.

I seem to gather from the comments, that upon registering your vehicle, you’re basically signing your property over to them. Is this true?

Does this entitle them to impounding my vehicle? Can I use the “right to travel” with an expired licence in the meantime of trying to come up with all the necessary money to renew it? If so which Canadian law should I refer to and be informed in? Check out the work of Dean Clifford. He’s a Canadian who successfully uses the right to travel. See the video embedded above in this article where Dean quotes Canadian law.

There are different opinions on registration. Some say registration means signing over the rights to the property being registered. Others say that is not true. The best way to know would be to read the definition of register in Black’s Law Dictionary, but more importantly, in the actual code or law passed. It could be defined differently in each law (such are the tricks of the Law Society). Most laws define key terms before getting into the nuts and bolts. Soooo if a license is only required if you are using your vehicle for commerce or business, then wouldn’t a license be required to simply use it to travel back and forth for work?

In that aspect, the vehicle is indeed being used for business purposes. It is business. Hence, business days. There are five business days in a week;). However, not everyone drives to and from work due to unemployment, so in that aspect, I don’t agree with licenses.

Traveling for leisure, or personal galavanting is another matter. Registration and insurance are more difficult to deal with. Trying to go without registration completely (as some have done, such as “free men” in Montana) will attract unwanted attention.

If you want to try to anonymize yourself, you can get a Common Law Pure Trust and find someone to act as a trustee, go to the DMV and register the car in the name of the trust. You could also be an occasional driver on someone else’s insurance. However, you could also get normal registration and insurance. Just because you possess these is not proof you are always in commercial jurisdiction. It’s a question of capacity.

In what capacity were you acting at the time of the alleged infraction? You can always argue you were privately traveling (not commercially driving), even if you have plates and insurance. I think the right to travel vs drive argument is invalid. Traffic regulation isn’t mentioned in the Constitution therefore the power generally falls to the States pursuant to the 10th Amendment, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.” So, it has long been accepted by the federal government that traffic regulation is a proper exercise of State police power. Federal courts uphold the ability of States to regulate road traffic provided it is done so with equality, resonableness and for the public good and doesn’t violate any federal laws or rights. All 50 States have seen fit to devise and enact their own traffic codes and police them.

If you want to review some Federal court decisions, please review Hendrick v Maryland 235 US 610, Hess v Pawloski 274 US 352, and Reitz v Mealey 314 US 33. These are three solid federal Supreme Court decision that set nationwide precedent that cannot be ignored. There are always two sides to every argument. Yes, we need traffic laws because we live in a society of irresponsible people.

If everybody agreed to be responsible then we wouldn’t need as many rules, but if people don’t, then you need a system to keep people in check. However, those who know how to extricate themselves from admiralty jurisdiction can enjoy a higher degree of freedom because they have displayed the wisdom and courage to earn it. Those who choose to operate within admiralty jurisdiction do so because they think they are supposed to. Both systems exist. There are always two sides to every story, the problem is the side that claims you can drive without a license, and it be completely legal, is false. The court cases cited, not one of them actually touches on the topic of a states right to reasonably enact traffic codes that contribute to public safety.

This includes licensing and holding insurance etc. The following court case is from the United States Supreme Court: Hendrick v.

Maryland 235 US 610 (1915) The movement of motor vehicles over the highways is attended by constant and serious dangers to the public, and is also abnormally destructive to the ways themselves... In the absence of national legislation covering the subject a State may rightfully prescribe uniform regulations necessary for public safety and order in respect to the operation upon its highways of all motor vehicles — those moving in interstate commerce as well as others. And to this end it may require the registration of such vehicles and the licensing of their drivers... This is but an exercise of the police power uniformly recognized as belonging to the States and essential to the preservation of the health, safety and comfort of their citizens.

States have the right, under their police powers to enact and enforce these laws. What these websites never want to admit is that the courts are not subject to legal definitions other than the ones that they use.

So states have the right to define what “traveling” is, they also have the right to define what a “motor vehicle” is. Every other legal book with definitions is not valid, only the definitions within a state’s particular traffic code are valid. Now we can argue that it isn’t OK for states to do this but it is the law of the land. This has been decided by the only entity that is allowed to interpret constitutional law, and that is the Supreme Court. So if you decide to drive without a license, you may be fined, even jailed for refusing to give it up, if you don’t have insurance, you will be fined. If you’re ok with that then please continue, but you have to recognize that the State’s have a right to place traffic laws within their borders.

There are many other Supreme Court cases that hold to this point, the ones that are posted in this article are invalid because they touch the real issue as mentioned earlier in my comment. Again, as I said in my previous comment, there are 2 systems/jurisdictions in place: common law and commercial/maritime/admiralty law. Commercial law is composed of Acts, Statutes, Regulations, Code, Policy, etc.

– all which claim to be “law” but are really just rules that govern certain societies. If you are not a part of that society, those rules do not apply to you. Remember the definition of statute: a rule which has the force of law with the consent of the governed. If you do not give your consent, the statute no longer has the force of law.

Yes, the States made traffic rules – all statutes. Commercial, statutory law does not apply to someone traveling privately! Many courts have upheld this. I have personally had situations overturned, and helped others have their cases dismissed, based on this knowledge. Think about it: how can you be charged under commercial/criminal statutes for the “crime” of not wearing a seat belt or not carrying a license?

Every crime must have a victim who can prove damage was done to him with malicious intent. Where is the malicious intent? Where is the provable damage? Where is the victim? By the way, the tenth amendment gave any power not explicitly given to the Federal Government back to the States and the People – not just the States. Where do the States get their power?

The people are always the source of power for any government. Everything comes back to the consent of the governed. All their “law” or really just rules are based upon you agreeing to enter that jurisdiction and give them your consent. Makia, Thank you for responding to my comment, I greatly appreciate you taking the time to respond.

I would like to bring up a couple of things in response Your division between common law and commercial law is a common division, but: 1. Common law was received by the individual State governments (former colonies) via reception statutes, clearly subject to the local State constitutions and legislatures (the same legislatures that make the highway codes). State legislation, such as the highway code, made by democratically-elected-and-influenced representatives of the people, is in fact the law of the land and unable to be avoided.

The federal Constitution, laws and courts offer no protection for your imagined right to travel unregulated. My previous post shows the Supreme Court saying residents and non-residents, commercial and non-commercial activity on the highways may be regulated by the States for public safety.

Your statement, in the previous post, was that the people have the power. This is true, but we the people elect officials, they act on behalf of us.

That’s how a democracy works. So the argument of being charged under commercial law doesn’t hold any water. I don’t deny that the defenses that you state in your article won’t work, but I am saying that as the law is interpreted there is no clear way of dividing the “travel” vs “driving” definitions. I would assume that most people that drive without a license do so in a very safe manner, but when caught it would appear that you don’t have a very firm foundation on which to stand.

Again thank you for your response. Hi Kevin, I understand that reception statutes were used to harmonize the law, take in all the common law, and place them under the umbrella of the Constitution and statutory law – but does that mean common law has ceased to exist, or that there is no such thing as common law jurisdiction? Judging by the amount of people still successfully claiming common law jurisdiction in courts today, I would say the evidence suggests not. For further analysis on this topic, I suggest Johnny Liberty’s book.

In it he writes a sample oral defense a citizen may use: “CITIZEN: “Your honor, the Constitution authorizes two criminal jurisdictions for the court. One of these is Common law.

But under the Common law there must be a corpus delecti or damaged party before the court can recognize any jurisdiction. This cannot be a Common law action because there is no sworn complaint from a damaged party. Therefore this court does not have a criminal jurisdiction under Common law.” (If the judge replies that this is a Common law court, then demand a “Bill of Particulars.”) “The only other criminal jurisdiction authorized for the court is the breech of an International Maritime Contract under the criminal aspects of an Admiralty jurisdiction. I’m not aware of having ever entered any maritime contracts, so I deny that any exist. Can you tell me what jurisdiction the court is exercising in the action against me?”. Hi, Makia, i appreciate all your efforts. You are amazing to me.

I live in Ontario, Canada and am becoming more and more frustrated everyday, with each interaction i have with local authorities. Essentially, after viewing that man’s video at the gas station, i see i have much work to do-learning all the legalities behind “common-law” law, but, who determines that a free person must even adhere to such laws as common-law, and why(you’re own personal opinion) you think we should? Thank you so much James. Good question. Common law came out of some very basic needs/desires for people to feel safe. Some say common law is really just 3 things: don’t hurt another, don’t damage another’s property, and don’t use mischief in your agreements with another.

As long as you live responsibly, no one will have much cause to complain against you but if they do, the idea was that common law could resolve any disputes peacefully. Of course, common law is the antithesis to our current commercial, statutory law which consists of hundreds of thousands of “laws” or regulations on the books. Quite a sizable portion are laws against something, but where there is no actual victim. It makes no sense to declare something a crime when there is no provable criminal/malicious intent, no damage and no injured party. The bottom line is this: if you are not harming anyone, what is the basis for the Government hassling you? It has no authority to protect you from yourself (e.g. By claiming you must wear a seatbelt).

Tyranny begins when the Government becomes a Nanny and tries to tell you how to live your life in every little detail. What most Americans FAIL to understand is, they have been brain washed. Brain washed to believe things that are NOT true and never WERE true. Just about everything you think is true, IS NOT. No American can be compelled to do anything.

Especially anything contrary to his or her best interests. These people telling you you must do this or that have a motive. That motive is control and revenue. The rotten fact is, the very government you believe in, isn’t a government at all. It’s a corporation, like Wal-Mart and ALL governmental services agencies; State, Municipal or Federal are NOT legitimate branches of government. The government of 1776 was suspended on March 27, 1861 when the southern states walked out of Congress.

A new, secretive corporate government was established July 9th, 1868. Since then of new agencies will state, federal and local cropped up. But these are not constitution departments of government. They are administrative, regulatory enforcement agencies enforcing not laws, but legislative codes. The DMV for example is the the administrative office of code pertaining to Motor Vehicles. But do you even know what motor vehicle is?

Chances are, you don’t. Do you own or drive one? Not likely, unless you transport property or passengers for hire over the public roadway. In America, our earliest ancestors came to escape the tyrannical bounds of feudalism of Europe, but believe me brother or sister, you people are now in deeper bondage than you can even imagine. You are a slave. And a slave can own nothing.

Tell me ONE thing of value you own with no further encumbrance. Bank lien, property taxes, easements, insurance payments, code enforcements. When you purchase a new car, the original manufacturers title, the MCO/ MSO is handed over the state to be digitally cataloged and then destroyed. You never even see it. But you paid for it.

The State then issues you a “color of title”, which is a State granted permission (privilege) to possess the car so long as you make the bank payments, keep insurance payments up to date and pay property taxes. Your children?

More and more people are finding their children being taken away over the slightest grievance by government never to be seen again. So, what IS your property? Are you getting the gist here? In fact, according to your friendly government, “The ultimate ownership of [ALL] property is in the State; individual so-called “ownership” is only by virtue of government, i.e., law, amounting to mere user; and use must be in accordance with law and subordinate to the necessities of the State.” Senate Document #43; Senate Resolution No. 62 (Page 9, Paragraph 2) April 17, 1933. It was by certain seminal congressional acts from the mid 1800’s since that are not taught in any school that we have been deceived and deprived of the unalienable and constitutional Right of Liberty and had these unlawful acts foisted upon us; (1) so-called Civil or municipal rights, (2) rules and regulations (statutes), which are NOT law by State legislatures as adjuncts of the Federal corporate government. And, (3) municipal (Roman civil) law in our courts, instead of the Common law upon which our nation was founded.

This ALL being a SAD state of affairs abhorrent to the Founding Fathers and Framers of the Constitution for which they all risked their lives and fortunes to escape and keep their posterity free. (That would be you!) But the truth is, “as a general rule, men have the natural right to do anything which their inclinations may suggest, if it be not evil in itself, and in no way impairs the rights of others.” In Re Newman (1925), 71 C.A. And, “every man is independent of [ALL] laws, except those prescribed by nature.

He is not bound by any institutions formed by his fellow men without his consent.” Cruden vs. Neale, 2 N.C. 338 (1796) 2 S.E. Who told you that? I wonder why? “The State is the name of the coldest of all cold monsters. Coldly it lies; and this lie slips from its mouth: I, the state, am the people.” -Friedrich Nietzsche It has been only by blinded belief through ignorance that the People have allowed themselves to be so governed on a tyrannical path that binds us to wretchedness which the occupiers of these seats of unlawful government have placed upon us.

But, be of good cheer! You can change that at any time.

Not alone, but those who know and understand the same. Education is our tool.

The true law itself is our sword. They fear us. Have no doubt. They know well their treachery and treason. Just as a single bee can be ignored, so can a maddened hive kill its invaders.

I gave this a shot after I returned home from UK and realized I had forgotten to get the reg sticker few months passed and hadn’t updated my license for a year, so I chanced a 2 hour trip north and got stopped by plate reader and cop with satellite flagging system apparently who nearly clipped me head on. I talked calmly and respectfully with the officer stating my traveling purpose. It’s true, they just repeat “driving is a privilege” like they are robots, but he ended up being an alright guy for once in my life. He even said, ” If I let you drive we’re both in the same boat” literally made me laugh right there.I managed to stand in my rights enough to prevent the car being towed but when it came to signing ticket, well, they will arrest you alot of times so I signed, “I conditionally accept retaining rights and privileges” with initials after. Strangely I called the magistrate day before ticket was supposedly due needing a plea and 50 bucks, and she said they hadn’t received it yet after 14 days and to call back after weekend monday. So I figured welp, hopefully they will throw it out or send a counter offer.

I called back monday, she put me on hold awhile then finally came back with a ticket number. The thing was the officer put no total, and on the back of the contract “which they don’t let you read!” it said “if no total call or appear”. Place was 2 hours away from home so I told her, I’m not agreeing to a contract or starting payment on something with no proof of a total on paper, signing a blank check!

Long story short, file papers/counter offers notarized and certified mail or they will dick you around. They sent a notice of license suspension when I was supposed to get a total in the mail, then when I called for the total again they sent an arrest warrant notice the day after I finally got it, in other words with no time to respond. Ended up paying 600 for damned useless little sticker which serves no purpose and chattel corporate slave card I don’t want to renew at all. The normal PA fine is 500 for 80 dollars of petty things. So, file your documents, phone does not count, even when they talk all nice and you think you’ve broken through some magic wall, they are liars.

Though I got no penalties for no plea, and did it over the phone with some 3rd party private corporation and had to pay the constable 100 dollar fee cuz they dicked me around and I didn’t file things, but I defeated the scary contract back side, kind of. I felt good, then broke, then defeated and pissed again. Seriously a registration sticker serves no purpose other than paying dmv and them personally for no crime, no injured party or property.

Crooks I’d maybe recommend talking to a sheriff or representative of the area you intend to travel first, and have a prepared identification statement for police who don’t know you’re passing through, or living there. Be respectful military style, they love power, indulge them a bit.

Soo, everyone needs to know this stuff, we need mass awakening or they will likely just tune you up. We need researchers to follow the money and publish, or else a government official to give you a personal free pass and notification to police departments. Otherwise, it worked a bit, I just messed it up.

But I wasn’t really trying to go all the way to common law court, or Pa supreme court, I just wanted to not be towed really. If anyone actually travels, please prove and show us how.

Maybe if I had filed counter offers they would eventually just dismiss it, or if I knew how to make a bonafied affidavit and claim breach of contract under UCC maybe I could have filed a lien on them for the suspension thing, or for deprivation of constitutional rights. Or maybe when it comes down to it, it’s just people, money worship, and the law flexed in all directions like a ship without a rudder in a corrupt satanic world of greed and ego. I still do not want to be chattel slave paper because China might want their property soon. Damned US and FED selling americans like inventory.

So tell me are you a government agent because you seem to not want the people to know the truth. Why are you reading this article and making comments if you don’t even need some type of assistance?

Yeah you have a right to say what you want but most people that look here need help. If you have any information that says we the people can’t do this and that please post it. And just so you know terry, “The constitution and the laws of the United States ( which shall be made in pursuance thereof ) and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land” etc. Terry the constitution is such a big deal my friend that cops, judges, lawyers all took an oath to support and defend it. And also the government personnel are all servants to we the people not the other way around.

So terry to sum up what I’m saying it is simply that state laws mostly are unconstitutional. And lastly terry nobody has jurisdiction (ownership) over we the people unless by a valid contract signed as an adult. In most cases the drivers license. So those people the cops can enforce traffic laws.

But it’s also failure for full disclosure for those guys too. So the government still can lose. So terry I hope you learned something in class today. Class dismissed.

In God we trust hahaha. You must be a government representative because we the people do have a right to drive without a license. We the people have constitutional rights that cannot be infringed by any law. The constitution is bigger than state laws. Did you even know about God given natural inherent rights? How about who has jurisdiction over the people?

Nobody or no state law is constitutional unless someone gets hurt and there’s a statement or an injured party. People you must exercise your rights at all government agencies.

Law library,court clerks office,etc. They all are against us we the people and anybody that tells you different is deceiving you. I’m one of we the people and a member of the state of New York. The way to drive without a license is by knowing a few things. Get a phone and hit the record. Tell cop you are reserving your rights and what rights.

I say I’m reserving all my God given and constitutional rights. Cop wants license huh? I’m invoking my right to remain silent.

Don’t gotta give license or nothing that can be used against me. People if no one has a statement against you the police are supposed to protect and serve. If u have a license you didn’t know u were giving up rights. That’s failure for full disclosure. Anyways after invoking, remember you can’t be denied life liberty or property without due process. In court it is so easy to get off first appearance.

Reserve your rights! Your honor I reserve all my God given natural inherent rights and my constitutional rights. Announce you will be representing yourself in propria persona. When asked if you know nature of charges say no.

Judge gonna ask what don’t you understand and you say I don’t understand the nature and cause of these charges. It might get dismissed then just because the police cannot press charges on the people they’re supposed to protect and serve. When a right of the people is violated, we can use the constitution to our defense. That’s what it’s there for! Look your next question would be is there an injured party here present or a statement from an injured party? When there isn’t that’s lack of an injured party and lack of jurisdiction of you never had a drivers license. Jurisdiction means ownership and no one owns the people.

Show me a contract with my name on it signed by me as an adult giving any entity ownership of me. Hard evidence. Case dismissed! Lack of jurisdiction people! You can only do these things in propria persona. Without a lawyer.

The public defender is not allowed to enforce your constitutional rights. Only you can. God given rights. In God we trust. Those that don’t assert their rights have none.

Shannon I realize it’s maybe too late for you but maybe not someone else reading. Two suspensions on your license. Do you even have a license? If not ever then hell yea real easy. Demand to see the suspended license and hard evidence.

If you had a license and its suspended or whatever, it’s hard but if you know the truth the courts can’t lie to you cause you know the truth, you know what I mean? And the truth is that everyone with a drivers license did not know they were giving up rights to travel and do what we want. On the application for a drivers license it does not state anywhere that you are giving up rights.

When you sign up, it’s a contract. You signed up to listen and obey to your servants hahaha. I’m sorry it’s just so funny the things the government get away with. And we’re the bad guys huh? Anyways by the contract not saying anything about you giving up any rights, that’s clearly failure for full disclosure. You have to know what you’re doing and to be willing to argue.

If you do a little homework you can do it. In God we trust. Everybody has constitutional rights as well as even more powerful rights are our God given inherited rights. After all you all know above the judge in the courtroom it clearly says “in God we trust”. You see what I mean? Being underage is a form of discrimination all day! First it was about wat color one is then it was gender now it’s too young.

You want facts my man how about studying about the phrase in the constitution which clearly states that “all men are created equal”. Equality is not something that a government can grant or deny a body of citizens; for this right is unalienable. Our bill of rights can be more accurately thought of as a list of restrictions ( placed on government) that secures a citizens civil liberties. (Noyes Historical Speeches) “Our Declaration of Independence says that each individual has certain basic rights, which are neither conferred by or derived from the state.

To discover where they came from, it is necessary to move back behind the dim mist of eternity, for they are God-given”. Man is also a synonym to human being. I just think this is a good way to go if anyone else don’t you have your opinion. I hope I’m not stepping on anyone’s toes by sharing with you what I really strongly think about your situation Jonah epps. Mr.Makia Freeman so u know I just wanted to tell the people that you and your team really know what you’re talking about and are trying to help us. I am one of the people and I learned a lot from you and your suggestions.

So thank you sir. I have court on March 24th 2016 in upstate ny for aggravated unlicensed operator,unlicensed operator and driving while license suspended.

Anyways I am 100 percent ready now and can’t wait for court. I would’ve gotten these charges dropped sooner but it took a few times of going in front of the judge to try my new skills. I even went to court unscheduled to challenge the prosecutor because I’m ready now. I did record that. The judge wouldn’t let me talk to the DA. You’d be proud makia if you heard me. So thanks again for providing me and the people with the knowledge and ability that didn’t know I had all along.

Happy New Year! I have noticed that the STATE BIRTH CERTIFICATE and the CERTIFICATE OF BIRTH are very different identifications of “Accounts”. Accounts are legally illustrated as “Glossa’s, being a marginal text and a corruption of the text according to Blacks Law Dictionary. A GLOSSA appears as the ALL UPPERCASE TEXT, being illustrative text and totally foreign to the descriptive text of English, (Grammatically speaking) also identified in the Chicago Manual of Styles: 11:144 and 11:147, under “FOREIGN LANGUAGES. I am also put through a lot of stress and imprisonments and impoundment of my cars but when I identify myself as the one in union with the CERTIFICATE OF BIRTH and not the Surname holder: evidenced by the STATE BIRTH CERTIFICATE, the court matter always falls over with charges remaining at large and me leaving the Court room or prison without any bail undertaking. “Rights” are not given by “gods,” rights are demanded by people who are willing and able to defend themselves by force. The concept of a “god” is simply a human conceptual icon for power and authority.

I agree with most of the “freeman” arguments in principal, but you too are brainwashed by your societal norms, namely religion. It is a bit ironic that you defer to your “god” in support of your claims of individual liberty, when in most cases the gods of antiquity, including Yahweh the Judeo-Christian bible god, were extremely authoritarian, and the related religious doctrine typically defines individualism as rebellion from god and sin. Rights are about survival, and fairness and justice in the real world, not about the dictates of some imaginary “god” that is alleged to exist somewhere in the sky. So, true “liberty” and intellectual honesty should have no connection to a person’s religious beliefs, which are simply fantasies. You seem like a pretty smart person Steve but you started losing me with all that stuff about religion and gods.

Tell you the truth I don’t care if there is a god or not. I don’t even go to church or study religion. But you know what Steve, the government and most of the planet believe in a higher power. You see it’s gods ways the constitution is supposed to be protecting. We the people are free as animals are free.

We can do whatever we want so long as we don’t violate anyone’s God given rights to life liberty or property. So as long as ( in God we trust ), we always gonna have freedoms to do what free men do. You are right about one thing though we the people must assert our rights in order to have them. Those that don’t assert their rights have none. And Steve I do believe in God, do you?

Makia – most of the people you’re explaining this to are the very reason why it’s so hard to get anything changed in this country today. Mass media and yes DMV brochures are in that category, help to promote and stifle any clue to those who don’t question anything and go along with the explanations given and confuse the difference between right and privilege. Most people are comfortable with the way things are until they’ve pulled it all from underneath you because they talked to you in a monotone voice and stroked your ego so now you’re against the idea that somehow Supreme Court rulings and the Constitution are supposed to be utilized for what and who it was written for – us against them. Your property is no longer your property today so why would anyone think the police, judges and lawyers have our best interest in mind? We’re regulated because it’s all about commerce, and commerce is a great way to regulate a persons life and life decisions. Can i still exercise my rights to travel.

My license was suspended for negligence on the courts and the DMV behalf, I was unaware I did not need it. I’ve been reading a lot of case law on drivers license vs traveler and I’m still a little confused. I’ve seen a few ruling on one and also the other not sure how accurate is the information I’m reading. Either way my main concern now is to exercise my rights to travel because it’s becoming more clear to me that we can travel without a license my question before knowing all this I had my license and it was suspended am I still able to exercise my right to travel without a license even though I technically was in contract because I had a license and then got it suspended but like I said I was not aware I did not need it nor did I know I was in contract can i still exercise my right to travel.

First I want thank-you for this info. I am 58 yr old with A.D.D. I only have a ninth-grade education so my vocabulary is somewhat limited. Yet, I’m no ordinary dummy. I just need to know if there are any key words or phrases you can help me out with? I’ve been charged with driving after suspension.

The first eight times I went to jail, so its needless to say I’m not afraid of that, I just don’t like it. Although I do love to travel. Anything you may throw my way is greatly appreciated. Again, thank-you.

Im not here to argue with anyone. That being said.court rulings have made it clear that an automobile is,and of itself,not inherently dangerous.

So on this assumption the average individual,licensed or not, should not be stopped on.the presumption that not having a license automatically makes him.incompetent to operate/drive/travel.in a motor vehicle. Also the assumption that just by having said license insures the licensee is competent to operate a vehicle is a gross mistake. How many fatal accidents are caused daily by “licensed” individuals? Also consider thisIf a person recieves thier license at age 16 then continues to renew it every four years in which case they are never again required to prove thier competency in the use of a automobile then how is that “licensed” elderly individuals suffering from dementia,Alzheimer’s,poor eyesight, etc are considered safer than anyone else?

You may call it legal “mumbo jumbo” but yhe Supreme Courts have upheld its a right not a privilege. That.s worded Law. Documented and irrefutable. Also the DMV operates as a corporation under the control and regulation of the DMV not as a body of government. Sounds tyranical to me. To charge a tax or excise fee for the Right stated by our Constitution sounds a bit like a form.of slavery.

And also to.make a point,many people have passed such licensing tests therefore proved competent to use a motor vehicle only to have the “privilege” revoked for reasons not inherently unsafe such as unpaid fines or back child support. Honestly can you tell me where failure to pay child support while in and of itself is morally wrong,has any basis on ones ability to safely operate a vehicle? Are you telling me I dont have the right as stated in the Constitution to walk along a public pathway? That I dont have freedom of speech? The right to a fair and speedy trial by a jury of my peers? The right to protect myself from illegal search and seizure? Why if I have all these Constitutional rights do I suddenly not have the right to travel upon public roadways as long as Im doing so in a safe manner?

If one must be “licensed” for this one act then why not give up all your rights and require permission for everything you do like the right to breathe? I have a case wherein i was stopped by a police officer after having already exited my vehicle having committed no violation whatsoever. I had a sandwich in my hand and was standing on private property when a sheriff’s deputy who was parked on the street ran my plates and looked up on his computer to see that one of the vehicle owners had a suspensed license and i was stopped because of his suspicion that i had a suspended license.

He assumed my license was suspended and pointed a taser at me and ordered me to get into my car, at which point i asked him if he had probable cause and to identify himself which he refused and became aggressive so i ran and was caught 45mins later, and was assaulted by the police and left in an unmanned police car for an hour on a hot summer day in the sun in the back seat and suffered heat stroke. How can i defend myself from the dwol in this case. Kev you don’t know me and I don’t know you. I’m just like you though, a human with natural God-given rights and guess what, we got constitutional rights which limits the powers of the government. Bro-god given rights – in God we trust. Do you get it? It’s everywhere.

So they recognize a god. Nobody can make us do shit without our consent.

Allowing them to tell us what’s right and wrong. My man, as long as you don’t violate anyone’s rights to life, liberty, or happiness, you’re not committing any crime. I’ll get into that in a minute. Constitutional rights are a bonus.

They keep the government from violating our rights as well as other citizens. It means the government has limited powers. If the constitution says we can bear arms, then we can. The only way it’ll work however is you must be in a constitutional court.

How do you do that? You must represent yourself in propria persona. That means you are defending your case however you see fit. You don’t gotta put in motions. You make demands! When you get any lawyer paid or not you are putting yourself in their jurisdiction. To use the constitution you MUST represent yourself.

Then you must be released because you are innocent until proven otherwise. Then you can use the right to bear arms! Do you get me! We the people secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity.

In God we trust! If the root of a plant is diseased, the whole plant is diseased. If the basic foundation of law is corrupted, the whole set of codes, regulations, statutes and admiralty law is corrupted. This issue is really one of jurisdiction.

The plain truth is that statutes are, by definition, maritime commercial rules. They only apply to commercial entities in commercial jurisdiction. Yes, the States made statutory laws to govern road use, but statutes only apply to fictional legal entities created through (for instance) birth certificates. They cannot apply to real, living, breathing man or woman, unless those people step into commercial jurisdiction and assume all of the responsibility and liability of that entity. A real attorney? You can debunk anything?

So you know, I’m a man. Nobody tells me what to do. Not the government or people like you that deceive the people. People like you are the real criminals.

You see, we the people are free as animals. We can really do whatever we want as long as we don’t violate anyone’s rights to life liberty or property. And as long as there’s no party claiming any loss damages or injury, there is no crime. Do you know mr attorney the elements for a crime to exist? Let me tell you real quick.

You ever hear of mens rea or actus reus? Or how about can you please tell the people the government’s definition of liberty because we the people secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity.

I’m gonna leave it here and see how you gonna debunk what I said or I’m right so far. You’re an idiot. If you believe in any one word written on this site, you really, truly, undeniably are an idiot. Let me explain: The shit written on this website is well written, and to an idiot who doesn’t know any better, will not confirm anything, do their own research, or care to go deeper to get a real understanding of the law.

Once you start believing what is written here, it’s too late. Your mind is infected, its parasitized, wasted.

You might as well kill yourself now. The shit written here does sound good right? Hah, don’t need a license, insurance, amazing right?

And look, they have court cases written by a judge that say that traveling in the driver’s seat of the car is a right, so they proved their point, OMG I can’t believe I was a slave to this corporation this whole time, my life is now changed forever! In reality all sovcits are delusional.

You can believe whatever you want, but if you ever try any of this in court, let me tell you, you will lose. You will have a one way ticket to jail! Judges will not listen to your drivel, not one single judge in the USA, or the world, will agree with you. So yes, go ahead and waste your life thinking your right and everyone else is wrong, but the fact of the matter is: you’re just a deluded idiot. CASE #2: “The right of the citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, either by carriage or by automobile, is not a mere privilege which a city may prohibit or permit at will, but a common law right which he has under the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” Thompson v. Smith, 154 SE 579. This is the typical nonsense I’ve come to expect from morons of this caliber.

Why don’t you inbreeds every post the rest of that statement? Because it utterly and completely eviscerates your argument. “he right of a citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon in the ordinary course of life and business is a common right which he has under his right to enjoy life and liberty, to acquire and possess property, and to pursue happiness and safety. It includes the right in so doing to use the ordinary and usual conveyances of the day; and under the existing modes of travel includes the right to drive a horse-drawn carriage or wagon thereon, or to operate an automobile thereon, for the usual and ordinary purposes of life and business.

It is not a mere privilege, like the privilege of moving a house in the street, operating a business stand in the street, or transporting persons or property for hire along the street, which a city may permit or prohibit at will. The exercise of such a common right the city may, under its police power, regulate in the interest of the public safety and welfare; but it may not arbitrarily or unreasonably prohibit or restrict it, nor may it permit one to exercise it and refuse to permit another of like qualifications, under like conditions and circumstances, to exercise it. The regulation of the exercise of the right to drive a private automobile on the streets of the city may be accomplished in part by the city by granting, refusing, and revoking, under rules of general application, permits to drive an automobile on its streets; but such permits may not be arbitrarily refused or revoked, or permitted to be held by some and refused to other of like qualifications, under like circumstances and conditions.” Wow. Look at that last paragraph will yah? Regulation of the right to drive may be accomplished by the city granting, refusing and revoking a drivers license.

Class dismissed. Thanks for your comment. However, the rabbit hole goes deeper than you think. As I wrote in my last comment and many times elsewhere, when the root is bad, the tree is bad and the fruit is bad. Fraud vitiates all.

The Government is attempting to enforce statutes (which can only exist in commercial jurisdiction) onto living, breathing entities which are more properly governed by common law. Where is the proof that statutes apply to living men and women, not their corporate strawman entity? Also, the US Government was secretly incorporated England in 1871 and became not only a corporation, but a foreign corporation at that. This means that its “laws” (really rules, code and policy which fraudulently take the color of law) are that of a foreign entity. Where is the proof that any of its statutes or “laws” apply to the sovereign men and women of the US Republic? You are mixing State supreme court ruling with us supreme court ruling and are either a government worker or just deceiving people for the kicks. The US supreme court has NEVER stated any thing other then your constitutional RIGHT to free Travel Can Not be Restricted by any State Federal Or municipal Government for your Constitutional Rights Over rule any Governments Restrictions and they are Illegal.

You Quote 1930 Virginia state supreme court Judge Acting Illegally against your Constitutional Federal Rights, The case you quote like the case from Idaho that led to the US Supreme Courts most recent Decision on NO LICENSE Is Constitutional In Any State Was Won In Idaho For the State as in Your Virginia Case The Judge Favored HIS State and BOTH Cases were Over Turned And The Free Travel No Licence People Won. Now Your Local And State Entities Drop Cases to prevent Spreading The Truth They are in violation Of Citizen Rights I Know I Just Had My Third Case Dismissed and Not Once Have I Lost In Court EVERY TIME Case Dropped. I Also Dont Pay Income Tax Cause Its Voluntary. It is really a moot point to bring up constitutional law for since the inception of the United States the constitution has been in a state of suspension.

All of the Supreme Court rulings are indeed favorable to the those who actually use it, they are in fact not the basis for law in the US and likely the same holds true for Canada. The foundational law is the Law of Land Warfare which I encourage everyone to read as it is only about 46 pages long.

The only way that their admiralty and statutory courts have jurisdiction over you is when you are found to be a “belligerent”. This happens to anyone who claims the name they use (the Trust) which in fact does not belong to you but to the state that created it.

It goes on to say that if one is a peaceful inhabitant, they must leave you, your property and possessions alone. They follow their twisted understanding of canon law to the letter but the statutory acts and laws are all fictional and cannot apply to a living manin fact they cannot hear a living man. The end of all “traffic” (commercial) stops is this; “At present I am not operating in any trade or business regulated by the United States, the state of (whatever state you are in) or any other state for that matter. So unless you have probable cause to believe that I have injured someone or intend to injure someone or unless you simply need my help for any reason I have much to do in the name of my Lord.” They no longer have any jurisdiction over you.it is about peace and love toward our brothers that counts. Indeed persecution will come but if you stick to this, they have no power over you for the living have power over the (legally) dead while the dead have power over nothing at all. If they hand you a “charge” to sign simply sign it “no contract”.

If they say you cannot do that tell that “what I have written I have written”. They will always presume you are “of the world” and they will hate you for this but the world hated our Master first so get used to it. My last court visit lasted about 45 secondsbe kind, do not resist but show compassion and love towards those who persecute you and throw you into the jailyour time will be short and they will wonder about you. Never swear before a magistrate, and never consent to anything they wish you to do but let them know that you will not resist if they force you. Again, never become a belligerent and the root of their law must be upheld. Blessings, Billy. I’ve seen this thing dozens of times now.

You guys are factually wrong about the whole “you’re travelling, not driving” thing. I see where you’re coming from, I mean, there’s a website with a perfectly good (and correct) law dictionary that lists the definition of driving like this: “One employed in conducting a coach, carriage, wagon, or other vehicle,with horses, mules, or other animals, or a bicycle, tricycle, or motor car, though not a street railroad car.” Now there are several problems with this. First one is a matter of grammar. If one were a taxi-driver, one would be employed *TO* drive. Not employed *in* driving a car (although he also would be that). The difference here is that when it says that you’re employed *in*, it means the same as saying “busy with”, not “hired to do”. The 2nd problem is that the edition of the book you’re using came out in 1910.

106 years ago. The definition has changed since then. Even the 4th revised edition, which came out in 1968 has changed the definition by adding this little bit at the end: “A person actually doing driving, whether employed by owner to drive or driving his own vehicle.” So by now there is absolutely no uncertainty about the definition. Like it says, if you’re driving (colloquial definition), you’re a driver by legal definition. Please, I actually do my research and so should you. Don’t take people’s words for it, no matter how much you want out of that ticket.

You’ll only make a laughingstock out of yourself. Yeah, I also didn’t know until, a month ago, that Americans may drive in excess of 100 mph on US highways with their flashers on, because they have the right to try to make it to their Momma’s funeral on time. Nobody may take their right do be at Momma’s funeral, no matter how dangerous it might. We’re all the best drivers on Earth. Countless dot.org Websites proves this beyond any doubt. In all my 40 years driving I never knew this to be Real True Fact. I have a Mom, a stepmom, some fathers.

Im 19 and appearantly still learning my constitutional rights, so Pardon any ignorance I may display when asking these questions. So I understand the difference between “Traveling” and “Driving”, as for one is a right that cannot be taken away while the other is merely a privilege. Where my confusion begins is here: I currently have a permit to drive and I also pay for insurance. Frustratingly, i cannot “drive” with others in the car unless they are of 24 years of age or older nor can I drive at night. Once I begin using my “Rights to Travel”, does this mean my insurance becomes “VOID” until I recognize myself as a “Driver”? If I were to “Travel” and get hit, am I no longer covered until I am a “Driver”?

I was not driving my vehicle. I was at a rest stop and had stayed a few hours (to sleep-was traveling from southern ca back home to oregon) and after taking change of clothes into the womens restroom and changing I got back in my vehicle. Being a female on such a long journey traveling alone, I am alert and aware of my surrounding especially at rest areas and truck stop like areas (many women targeted when traveling, dangerous) so when going from vehicle to bathroom and back i have my pepper spray (hanging around my neck) in hand ready as well as a stunner in the other inside sweatshirt or jacket pocket until safely inside my vehicle. After i return to my vehicle and am getting situated and pulling out my phone to text family my update on my journey and look for local mechanic (check my vehicle condition and get ok for long trip) i notice a law enforcement vehicle pull up in my review mirror. So i rolled down my window and greeted the officer politely and smiled asking how he was and if i could help him etc. Long long story short, i was put in the backseat of the officers vehicle after i was asked if i had anything illegal on me, i said no, then quickly let him know i wasnt sure if a stunner was legal in ca but was one in pocket.

I told him truth about my visit and purpose for being so far from home. I watched for what seemed like forever while he turned my car inside out searching for mass amounts of illegal controlled substances (he assumed and even told me he didnt believe i wasnt “muling” drugs in my little car) when he was done and as i had stated to him, there was not anything of such and there was nothing to find he let me out of his vehicle after of course writing me a ticket and informing me he was taking a marijuana smoking device and “paraphernalia” and that I must show up at the court on the date on the ticket.

This court date was originally set for july 2016 but when i called the court they said that it was rescheduled and i should have received notice via mail. I said i had not so they printed and mailed me one after the phone call. Now the new court appearance is sheduled for september 2016.

I am just wondering if theres any way any of the stuff in your article or these pages that can be applied or exercised in my particular case to dismiss this. The only thing signed was the ticket where it saids “WITHOUT ADMITTING GUILT, I PROMISE TO APPEAR AT THE TIME AND PLACE INDICATED BELOW.”. This topic is really a small beginning to the way our human rights have been suppressed. If you take the time to study human rights you will see that our rights are suppose to be taught in school because they are so very important. But human rights are hidin from us cause if we knew them, we wouldn’t put up with this legal system that tramples our rights. I believe all legislation is infringing on our rights and we put up with it cause we don’t know our rights. The more you study human rights, the more you see how far off track we are in regard to the way people should be.

There is a need for a revolution, not just here but the whole world. We need to come together to fight oppression world wide. All government are responsible to the needs of the people.

Now with this topic of travel driving, I think we have to realize that courts and police need to be our allies. The government military would be needed to over throw the real problem. There is a group of the wealthiest people in the world that really control everything, The planes crashing into the World Trade Towers started this topic for me. What took place that day made me come to realize that I can’t trust the government about ANYTHING!! Because the Government is bought off by big business. This is no less important than what Hitler did We need to gather in masses to overthrow the real problem BANKS They have so much money and power they can do anything or pay someone to do anything.

I’m not talking about that bank down the road but the families that own the banks We will have to come together with ALL our strength to lock them up for crimes against humanity. In 2012 I was pulled over in Reading, Pa (Berks County) for going the wrong way down a one way street. My license was under suspension for a DUI that I received in May 2007.

Driving while your licesnse is under DUI suspension in my state carries a mandatory jail sentence of 60-90 days. I missed the court hearing bc I moved out of the area so I was automatically found guilty and was given a hefty fine and the mandatory jail sentence. I would like to appeal the sentence and attempt to fight it bc I am a single mother and I work 2 jobs.

Going to prison for any length of time would have a substantial negative effect on my life, including the custody situation of my children. Is there a way for me to go into court and plead not guilty and be found not guilty for driving under DUI suspension and have the jail sentence overturned? Also, my actual DUI suspension was finished in November of 2010, however, my inability to pay off the exorbinent fines and court costs that were imposed, kept my drivers license suspended, even still to this day. I was pulled over for the driving under DUI suspension infraction in August 2012.

If I had been able to afford the fines, my suspension would have been up almost 2 years prior to getting pulled over. Now I am not able to get my license back until January 2017, and I still have a ridiculous amount of fines to pay off. When I looked at the break down of the fines, 75% of them were ridiculous court costs, not even the actual fine, or the driving classes associated with the actual DUI. So what can I do to help get rid of some of these fines and what can I do to fight the driving under DUI suspension infraction?

I have understood what the “Law of the land” so I faithfully failed to succeed in “Traveling” in this country without a licence. What I mean by that is. In California in the county of Santa Cruz. Have been charged and done jail time for this right I so call posses.

Even gone through the “Challenging jurisdiction to the judge itself. It said “It is under a Statutory Jurisdiction” I was in line to expose the courts fraud by stating. “Where can I find the criminal procedure for this Statutory law so I can properly defend myself, and conduct a fair trial”. It pointed at some literature on its desk and said right here and you don’t have access to those procedures”. And I got pulled over again, got court Oct,19th 2016 YEA U.S. Supreme court ruling in our favor for our right to travel.

I was sententenced to a DUI recently after a traffic stop where I was pulled over for weaving. The officer did not give me a field test because, I believe, he knew I would have passed. This is my first and only criminal offense in my life.

I got probation for 2 years, over $2,000 worth of fines. I will lose my license for 2 years, (suspension). I was also charged and convicted of reckless endangerment because my son was in the car. There was no accident or injury but I felt so demoralized and ashamed. Now I find that my sentencing was in the paper and on Google.

I feel like, OK, I made a mistake and I am sorry and will be careful not to let it happen again. I love my son with all my heart and feel that despite all this, I am still a good mom.

But now all people see is my new criminal recordnot that I was a professional violinist and teachernot my work with childrennothing matters except the bad. Can anyone out there help or just relate. I would appreciate it. In addition, I live out in the country and am frightened about having to travel in an emergency.

I can’t risk going to jail. I really don’t have anyone I trust to leave my son with.

If my driving suspension were only for six months, which my plea deal was based on, I think I could get through itbut 2 years for my first offense is a lot, I think. My friends can’t believe it. I really would like to see the pol8ce tape, if it exists, to see if I was really weavindany way to get ahold of it? I also was recently sentenced of dui in Montana. I was given a probationary license which they call “essential driving only”. I really am a good driver.

I was profiled by being out at the wrong hour. Officer said I was weaving, however on discovery video tape I was not. That being besides the point, the law says I can drive to work, alcohol treatment program, to look for work, etc.

Essential driving only. Is there a way around this law? I am reading a lot on this blog that is referring to traveling, not driving. All the fines were quite hefty but not being able to go visit family is the hardest part of it all. Or simply not being able to go where I want to go.

Any info will be greatly appreciated. Can I get some help? I’ve been having a rough last few years. Now heading in a new direction getting into internet marketing. It’s slow and I’m broke, homeless and have a family.

I live in Haverhill, Massachusetts. Have court on at the haverhill court house for 3 charges. License not in possession, unregistered car and no plates. I see 3 accounts of failure to intervene and 1 account of malicious prosecution. Was threatened imprisonment, told I was infact a operator when I had already made it clear I was a traveler in my automobile. They stated my ss card was my license.?

Totally didn’t check any of the case law I had or definitions to actual laws they were trying to charge me with. Stole my 91 accord. I’m frigging homeless. Hi there, just joined, so sorry if this is late. Karl Lentz is a person who knows all about Law and Statute; he got his child back after it was stolen by the state when the baby was born. It took him six years to understand what was going on.

Watch the video here This will help 100% in not being given any pecuniary levy, (fine, tax etc) and will enable you to travel freely, here Below is the same document, but from the other end of the perspective, showing why you do not have to pay tax, here If one link is not working, use the other one. This lot will help you completely.

I agree, Janelle. I’m of the opinion that as soon as you go to the DMV with the title to the car you just bought signed off by the owner, you’re requesting a new one with your name on the title. Seems to me the State still owns our cars! Regardless if we even drive it, or insure it. You can’t even get the insurance without a drivers license, and you can’t register without insurance. They got us no matter what, I think. My question still standshow do you prove ownership of the car you’re driving without the registration, insurance, or last but now least, A TITLE, WHICH IS REQUIRED TO BE TRANSFERRED TO THE NEW OWNER WITHIN 30 DAYS OF THE SALE.

As much as I appreciate someone with an opposing view to challenge the article, I do not see how the process is at all necessary to issue one a drivers license. You claim once one has been issued one, they have not to think about it, seems to be so far from the truth. For starters, between the time and money involved just to renew that unnecessary document you deem so necessary, is beyond burdensome in the span of a lifetime to contend with, notwithstanding tickets, and violations committed with it. Points and a record attached, not to mention suspensions, notices, revised codes, etc. I do not think a mere license, and the passing of a 10 minute road test, is at all the measure of a responsible operator, or even one who is remotely safe. You will find no State that issues these licenses, that will assert that a driver once receiving one, will be deemed by that very State, as safe.

Only experience and prudence can ensure safety. Yet in spite of all this, millions of LICENSED DRIVERS nonetheless get into accidents,get killed, injured, and even drunk in vehicles. So much for licenses being necessary, and or assuring responsibility, and safety. Do you not see? Drivers are compelled to carry insurance, why? It ought to be to insure no one but themselves, but the fact is it is more so to insure others from them!

So much for a license to deem one as responsible or safe. I must confess we live in such a state of backwardness that what, if looked logically would command otherwise.

The mark of a safe, responsible driver,is one who has sufficient experience, one who commits 0 traffic violations, one who gets in no accidents, or is at least never the cause. Understand what a license is in it’s physical nature, a mere document. Responsibility and safety, two indispensible virtues to ensure safety on the roads, is not necessarily inclusive to a State issued license, but State issued licenses may be exclusive to the two. As an overwhelming record of historical statistics will evidently provide you, without any assistance from me. The error begins with people putting stock in certifications, licenses, and the like, to ensure competence and safety, yet it is the indispensible virtues of character they call for, that can only attain, and maintain them. Tell me what is to be reasonable in even a safety aspect, the requisite of a drivers license.

I still cannot think of any? One of the gravest mistakes of the people of any nation, is to leave it to the government to be responsible for them, rather than leaving themselves responsible for their government. It strikes me uneasy do to that fact that it seems nobody has ever addressed the issue of proof of ownership of the vehicle you’re driving. The only “proof of ownership” as far as I know is a certificate of title, including any vehicle I’ve bought from a dealer, or private owner. So, the “history” of that vehicle since day one has always been the State the car was registered in a the “real owner”?

Anybody that know’s the answer to this one, “How do you prove you’re the owner of the car with no title, or registration”? This is mind blowing, I came across this website after looking for a 50cc scooter, something i could drive to and from probation with out a drivers license to complete an addiction program for the next 2 years. I have not had a license over 25 years for a driving on a restricted license. Ive never herd of Travel VS privilege to drive. The rights everyone has stated i was totally unaware of and boy do i feel stupid/ ignorant. Im 58 and a military veteran & own my home. I was arrested for a DV charge Dec.

2 2016 over a person that owes me thousands of dollars and will not pay me back, yes i did go to jail. I have not worked since 2009 and near broke now. I want to complete this program so I can get my life back on track without the disease i have/had.I have been clean/sober every since. Im to old to get in trouble anymore and lost all desire to do what wrecked 1/4 of my life.Being able to drive would give me back me freedom to go places,get back to work and complete this program. Anyones help would be greatly appreciated. This ain’t gonna work if your stopped while behind the wheel of a car on a highway by some hard arsed cop waearing a gun.

He IS going to do you what ever obscure laws you want to quote at him. Plenty of people get thrown in jail by representitives of this police state for not doing anything illegal. This isn’t 1780 when you could go where you liked, do what you liked and you were your own law as long as you stood tall and were hard enough to knock anyone down who disputed it. We are all fecked by the mass wimps of the world.

Hi all, the PDF document I’m posting is 100% correct. If this is not accessable, this link is the same document, but from a different perspective. Canada, North America, Uk, Australia, New Zealand, and a few others, are all under the primary control of Elizabeth Windsor. All barristers are oathed to her. Statute is a rule, which, if accepted, is governed by her; notwithstanding some common rights pertinent to specific countries. A human is free, but the juristic person, (registration of fictitious person, Mr, Miss) is owned by the state. If you accept this fictitious person and represent it, you have to obey their rules.

A human cannot dictate to another human what it can or cannot do, save injury or death, or property theft/destruction. A fictitious person (police, judge, government official) cannot ditate to a human, as they are a fiction. If done, then recourse in law, (common law, meaning jury of twelve persons) as to unlawful action by official, who acted through human contractor as agent, i.e., policeman/woman (man/woman employed to act as) arrested human person, but did not arrest the juristic person, can be taken, and a pecuniary advantage, (fine, lien) can be demanded. Hope this helps. Very well said.YES it is all trueWe are under BRITISH MARITIME LAWFREEMASONRY. The only part of the United States is the piece of garbage called WASHINGTON D.

THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.a Masonc term.COLUMBIA as the hollywood studio(COLUMBIA PICTURES).a MASONIC GOD. ALL THE OTHER LAND IS OWNED BY THE CROWN and the deed is in TEMPLE BAR in LONDON under a TRUST. THE MAJORITY OF LAWYERS ARE FREEMASONS AND KNOW THIS!!! Jordan Maxwell has explained this for many years,as well as others.

You can find Jordan Maxwell on youtube videos. Hi, my mother lost my birth certificate when I was younger and she never got a replacement. Seeing how I was born on a U.S. Military base overseas I have not been able to request a new birth certificate without massive complications, to where I have to go to where I was originally born at which I can’t without a passport. I can’t get a passport without my birth certificate. So I would like to travel but seeing how I am disabled mother of two and my husband is also disabled and there are times I need to drive his truck back home. If I wanted to get my license I can’t, which I don’t want to get it because I do not believe I should have to get a license just to travel to the store for food.

Now is there a way I can inform the police department that I am traveling without a license and I am standing up for my constitutional and civil rights as a woman to travel without a license??? This is my answer to the problem. It’s a single page document. I have not had the privilege of using it yet.

After asking if I am free to go, if the response is no, I will give this to the officer and keep my mouth shut. _________________________________________________ NOTICE TO OFFICERS I am unarmed, and offer no resistance to you doing what you perceive to be your job. However, because you are heavily armed and I rightfully fear for my life, I will remain in the safety and protection of my locked car at all times. I also invoke my right to remain silent during this encounter, and I do not consent to any search, incidental or otherwise. My muteness is not intended to be rude or disrespectful to you or your office, merely an exercise of my protected right to remain silent. By continuing this detainment you give your consent to be filmed and recorded for the public record and the safety of all involved.

I reserve the right to do so at my discretion. I am traveling today in my Private capacity, under my Common Law right to do so, and not exercising agency or office as a legal person on behalf of any governmental entity. Because of that fact, it would be illegal and unlawful for me to present you with any documents that would suggest otherwise, such as a drivers license or other documents identifying such a legal person or status. In lieu of and for your convenience, I have included a photocopy of the drivers license I obtained for use as identification of the fictional legal person I administrate during times I choose to act in agency or for governmental purposes.

It is also provided as evidence of my competency in controlling my conveyance. I do not and can not authorize it’s use today without engaging in fraud, and by using it’s information you agree to accept any liability or penalty for it’s unauthorized use. You further agree to stand as surety for and represent the legal person it identifies in any matter arising from this detainment and/or your use of the information, including any court proceedings. PHOTOCOPY OF LICENSE Number xxxxxxxxx Legal Person – XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX Address – XXXXXXXXXXXX DOB – x-x-x I choose to not sign any documents or contract with you in any way today. If you wish to make any documents or citations concerning this detainment, you may pass them to me through the window and attach this document to the copy you keep as part of the public record so made. I reserve all rights, including the right to pursue damages for any violation of my rights under color of law. I wish you a safe and peaceful day.

_________________________________________ I can’t imagine any cop doing anything other than sending me on my way. But cops are not always rational or reasonable people. If he writes a ticket, that is fine by me and he agrees to stand as surety for the charges and in representing the legal fiction the court will recognize. I will show up as administrator and direct the judge to address him in the matter. No threats, and it is NOT my job to educate him or quote pointless law or court decisions.

I tell him who I am, and who I am not. Maybe one day I will get the opportunity to see how well it works. I have a drivers license for specific purposes, but that in no way indicates that I am always on duty representing the legal fiction it identifies. Comments are welcome. Darren if u choose to obey your servants that’s your choice. I’m a master unlike yourself and I do what I want as long as I’m not violating another humans rights. No victim no crime.

Protect and serve is the government s job. Protect our rights and serve justice on those that violate ours.

Unconstitutional laws are laws that violate our rights. Laws are rules and regulations created by the government to force obedience. If you or your child was traveling then you are responsible for your actions.

If you hit my kid you violated a right. You should get locked up if u can’t pay damages losses or injuries. It’s obvious you are very obedient to your servants so whose the idiot slave.

Hi I live in the state of PA.5/24/17 I was traveling in my vehicle heading to a mechanic to get an issue looked at with my vehicle and afterwards heading to church for a special event. In less than half an hour I was stopped in my vehicle and then officer pulled up behind me suggesting that my inspection and Emissions stickers were invalid. This was correctly so which is also the reason I was going to the mechanic.

My driver’s license was suspended however I was not using my vehicle for any type of commercial activity only for only for personal use under the right to travel. Needless to say in the state of PA my vehicle was impounded and now I have to deal with occurring penalty fees due to impoundment storage. Is there any way to dispute this in court and have my vehicle released without having to pay incurred penalty fees? My vehicle checked out fine and clear, as stated by the officer. My vehicle was impounded because of my driver’s license being suspended.

I live (am domiciled) in New Mexico state, which now requires all new or re-newed driver’s licenses to conform to the Real ID Act, which I know is an undisclosed adhesion contract for tax entrapment purposes. My current driver’s license is due to expire soon, and I want to use the opportunity to return all indicia of contractual obligation (driver’s license, license plate, certificate of title, and registration) to the state Tax and Revenue department/MVD (I’m not sure which ). I would like to find solid information for carrying out the above procedure, and what I will need to have instead for Traveling non-commercially in my private capacity as a free and sovereign man on the land. Do I notify the local/state police of my lawful rights, or simply deal with them as the occasion arises? I would LOVE TO HEAR from anyone who has knowledge/experience in New Mexico, or which can be applied to my situation! Can anyone help? MUCH obliged, Scott.

You need to have your private vehicle that you use non-commercially registered in accordance with your state law, and you need to also have a valid drivers license. Spare yourself the trouble that you will definitely get into by following the BS on this site and others like it. The “license and registration not needed for travel” argument is an incredibly bad one, and will only cause you trouble.

There is no basis for the arguments these guys make, the ability for states to regulate private travel has been upheld in courts since the 1920’s. Trying to change current law via the appropriate channels is fine, and I applaud those who are attempting to do so. Until such laws have been effectively changed, I would adhere to the current laws as they are written. That’s my two cents. I have been trying to travel ie not drive in canada as a canadian citizen but the police take the car anyway even thought its not myn and is registered to my gf and we buy permits to drive the car witch is insurance for the car i have a driving prohibition for 2 years and it was supposed to be up in november 23th i was traveling recently to a campsite not driving and the police pulled my gfs car over for going over the speed limit even though i was over taking another car that was going 60kmh in a 80 kmh zone i didnt even get a chance to slow the car down.