"The term `travel' and `traveler' are usually construed in their broad and general sense ... so as to include all those who rightfully use the highways viatically (when being reimbursed for expenses) and who have occasion to pass over them for the purpose of business, convenience, or pleasure."

25 Am.Jur. (1st) Highways, Sect.427, Pg. 717


"Traveler -- One who passes from place to place, whether for pleasure, instruction, business, or health."

Locket vs. State, 47 Ala. 45;
Bovier's Law Dictionary, 1914 ed., Pg. 3309


"Travel -- To journey or to pass through or over; as a country district, road, etc. To go from one place to another, whether on foot, or horseback, or in any conveyance as a train, an automobile, carriage, ship, or aircraft; Make a journey."

Century Dictionary, Pg. 2034




"Driver -- One employed in conducting a coach, carriage, wagon, or other vehicle ..."

Bovier's Law Dictionary, 1914 ed., Pg. 940




"It will be observed from the language of the ordinance that a distinction is to be drawn between the terms `operator' and `driver'; the `operator' of the service car being the person who is licensed to have the car on the streets in the business of carrying passengers for hire; while the `driver' is the one who actually drives the car. However, in the actual prosecution of business, it was possible for the same person to be both `operator' and `driver.'"

Newbill vs. Union Indemnity Co., 60 SE.2d 658





"... Traffic thereon is to some extent destructive, therefore, the prevention of unnecessary duplication of auto transportation service will lengthen the life of the highways or reduce the cost of maintenance, the revenue derived by the state ... will also tend toward the public welfare by producing at the expense of those operating for private gain, some small part of the cost of repairing the wear ..."

Northern Pacific R.R. Co. vs. Schoenfeldt, 213 P. 26


Note: In the above, Justice Tolman expounded upon the key of raising revenue by taxing the "privilege" to use the public roads "at the expense of those operating for gain."

In this case, the word "traffic" is used in conjunction with the unnecessary Auto Transportation Service, or in other words, "vehicles for hire." The word "traffic" is another word which is to be strictly construed to the conducting of business.

"Traffic -- Commerce, trade, sale or exchange of merchandise, bills, money, or the like. The passing of goods and commodities from one person to another for an equivalent in goods or money ..."

Bovier's Law Dictionary, 1914 ed., Pg. 3307

This is about the stupidest topic now..

Listen, whatever laws were - aren't today in many cases. If I cared, I could find quotes of random shit that say all types of random stuff too. Anyway, point is whatever local/state laws that are enforced, override any other laws or theories... the Country is setup that way.

If one law says you need a Lic to operate a Motor Vehicle and they set some standard to it... then it is. For the idea of safety, we don't have a bunch of 10 year old and 90 year olds, drunks and extreme assholes driving cars. It's not a bad thing.

It doesn't make you a slave, it doesn't mean evil men did this to you and are now taking over. It doesn't mean you're birth cert is a bond or debt or anything like that. As I said before, we have more roads and more costs than we did a 100 or even 30 years ago and it's about the cycle of money. It's a system built by the people...

Stop fearing it.

You are just making more of a fool of yourself than you already are. There is a joke among attorneys that is not really a joke but is fact. The law is whatever the judge says that it is and this is fact until...possibly...a higher judge rules differently...then the law is whatever he says that it is. Like it or not that is our system and all must abide by the system or be willing to pay whatever consequences may be applicable. BTW...what was law in yesteryear...may very well not be law today...or in a future year...so quoting things from yesteryear may or may not have any import today.

You have a real obession going for yourself.

You giving up? :1orglaugh:1orglaugh






"The permission, by competent authority to do an act which without permission, would be illegal, a trespass, or a tort."

People vs. Henderson, 218 NW.2d 2, 4



"a permit, granted by an appropriate governmental body, generally for consideration, to a person, firm, or corporation, to pursue some occupation or to carry on some business which is subject to regulation under the police power."

Rosenblatt vs. California State Board of Pharmacy, 158 P.2d 199, 203



"A license fee is a charge made primarily for regulation, with the fee to cover costs and expenses of supervision or regulation."

State vs. Jackson, 60 Wisc.2d 700; 211 NW.2d 480, 487

The fee is the price; the regulation or control of the licensee is the real aim of the legislation.

Each law relating to the use of police power must ask three questions:

1. Is there threatened danger?

2. Does a regulation involve a Constitutional Right?

3. Is this regulation reasonable?

People vs. Smith, 108 Am.St.Rep. 715;
Bovier's Law Dictionary, 1914 ed., under "Police Power"


"The automobile is not inherently dangerous."

Cohens vs. Meadow, 89 SE 876;
Blair vs. Broadmore, 93 SE 532

To deprive all persons of the Right to use the road in the ordinary course of life and business, because one might, in the future, become dangerous, would be a deprivation not only of the Right to travel, but also the Right to due process




"With regard particularly to the U.S. Constitution, it is elementary that a Right secured or protected by that document cannot be overthrown or impaired by any state police authority."

Connolly vs. Union Sewer Pipe Co., 184 US 540;
Lafarier vs. Grand Trunk R.R. Co., 24 A. 848;
O'Neil vs. Providence Amusement Co., 108 A. 887


"The police power of the state must be exercised in subordination to the provisions of the U.S. Constitution."

Bacahanan vs. Wanley, 245 US 60;
Panhandle Eastern Pipeline Co. vs. State Highway Commission, 294 US 613


"It is well settled that the Constitutional Rights protected from invasion by the police power, include Rights safeguarded both by express and implied prohibitions in the Constitutions."

Tiche vs. Osborne, 131 A. 60


"As a rule, fundamental limitations of regulations under the police power are found in the spirit of the Constitutions, not in the letter, although they are just as efficient as if expressed in the clearest language."

Mehlos vs. Milwaukee, 146 NW 882

A Citizen cannot be forced to give up his/her Rights in the name of regulation.

"... the only limitations found restricting the right of the state to condition the use of the public highways as a means of vehicular transportation for compensation are (1) that the state must not exact of those it permits to use the highways for hauling for gain that they surrender any of their inherent U.S. Constitutional Rights as a condition precedent to obtaining permission for such use ..."

Riley vs. Laeson, 142 So. 619;
Stephenson vs. Binford, supra.



"To be that statute which would deprive a Citizen of the rights of person or property, without a regular trial, according to the course and usage of the common law, would not be the law of the land."

Hoke vs. Henderson, 15 NC 15


and ...

"We find it intolerable that one Constitutional Right should have to be surrendered in order to assert another."

Simons vs. United States, 390 US 389

Giving up over what? None of this proves any point other than you're a odd ball that collects half quotes to try and twist subjects so you're correct about your view point of something.

It's like your gideons brother or something.

To them it only has one side...

"People" state all types of random bullshit in court cases, criminals say they're innocent but it doesn't make it true. Notice the quotes don't say who said them - they're taken from a website that cut the source for a reason. For all we know these are arguments but the end result is totally different.

http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com..._licensing.htm

It proves everything I said. A drivers license is for commercial purposes. Everyone is turned into a corporate entity doing business on the roadways. It turns a law of the land natural right into a privilege for taxation purposes.. Police officers are therefore revenue officers. The money is hidden from the people.. You say "recycle money" I say "theft by deception"

Wrong source but thanks I like this

"Yet, not one individual has been given notice of the loss of his/her Right, let alone before signing the license (contract). Nor was the Citizen given any opportunity to defend against the loss of his/her right to travel, by automobile, on the highways, in the ordinary course of life and business. This amounts to an arbitrary deprivation of Liberty.

"There should be no arbitrary deprivation of Life or Liberty..." Barbour vs. Connolly, 113 US 27, 31; Yick Wo vs. Hopkins, 118 US 356. "

"People" eh? lmao you and theking are becoming so obvious these days.. Ever feel like you're on the losing side?

Who pays for the roads in your world?

Gas tax..

Bernanke Admits what Caused the Great Depression

"Let me end my talk by abusing slightly my status as an official representative of the Federal Reserve. I would like to say to Milton and Anna: Regarding the Great Depression. You're right, we did it. We're very sorry. But thanks to you, we won't do it again."

http://www.federalreserve.gov/BOARDD...08/default.htm


hmm:1orglaugh