1. Stocks continue up, all is aok. Metals flat to weaker.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Good Tues Morning! Gold is down 0.8 to 1260 while Silver is down 5 to 1714. Crude is down 49 to 5064. The USD is down 10 to 9677.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. Week of 5/13/2017 Closing prices & Chg Over Last Wk---- Gold $1227.70-- UP 0.80 Silver $16.40-- UP 13 Oil $47.84-- UP 1.62 USD $99.13 -- UP .61
  4. "Spreading the ideas of freedom loving people on matters regarding high finance, politics, constructionist Constitution, and mental masturbation of all types"
    Dismiss Notice

That Time I Turned a Routine Traffic Ticket into the Constitutional Trial of the Century

Discussion in 'U.S. Constitution & Law' started by Goldhedge, Jan 13, 2017.



  1. Goldhedge

    Goldhedge Modal Operator/Moderator Site Mgr Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2010
    Messages:
    26,377
    Likes Received:
    28,460
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Tech
    That Time I Turned a Routine Traffic Ticket into the Constitutional Trial of the Century
    by Adam J. MacLeod
    within Constitutional Law

    January 13th, 2017

    Laws that give municipal officials and their private contractors power to issue tickets via traffic cameras confer powers of both criminal and civil law while excusing them from the due process duties of both criminal and civil law.

    The traffic-camera ticket: like a parking ticket, it looks lawful enough. When they receive one, most people simply write the check. It seems like the sensible and law-abiding thing to do.

    But this is not a parking ticket. In legal terms, it is not a proceeding in rem—against your car. It is a legal action against you personally. And before you pay the fine, you might want to hear my story.

    My story is not legal advice. I offer it only to show how our ruling elites have corrupted the rule of law and to suggest why this matters for the American experiment in self-governance.

    The Ticket

    My story begins with a confession: I got a traffic-camera ticket. An affidavit signed by a Montgomery City police officer, it averred that I had committed a particular traffic violation on a certain date, at a certain time and location. It showed a photograph of one of our family vehicles. It charged me with a “civil violation” of “criminal law.”

    I wasn’t driving the car. In fact, at the time I was in a faculty meeting at the law school where I teach. Thus, I decided to challenge this injustice on the principle of the thing.

    Municipal Court

    On the appointed day, I tromped over to municipal court and sat down among those accused of armed robbery, drug dealing, and other misdeeds. After an hour, a bailiff emerged to herd into a corner of the courtroom those of us who had appeared for the slightly more respectable offense of owning a speeding vehicle. We waited some more, first for the clerk, and then to be called individually to meet the clerk. Those of us who requested a hearing (evoking an exasperated, poor-idiot-thinks-he’s-Perry-Mason expression) then waited for a magistrate to show up. Then we each waited our turn to appear before the magistrate.

    After a summary hearing, the magistrate ruled against me. So I appealed to the county-level Circuit Court.

    Actually, I tried to appeal. The clerk’s office made me wait in the lobby. When they finally saw me, they insisted that I provide a criminal appeal bond. But I wasn’t convicted of a crime, I protested. No matter. No appeal bond; no appeal.

    No, we don’t accept checks. Come back with the amount of your ticket in cash. I found an ATM and returned, only to be left waiting in the lobby again. When I was readmitted, I saw a different employee who insisted on twice the amount of the ticket in cash. I left and returned again.

    More waiting.

    The City Attorney

    Next, I called the City Attorney to see if she really wanted to go through with this. She did.

    One does not expect municipal officials to be paragons of lawfulness. But it is a bit jarring to encounter a City Attorneywho evinces no interest in, much less knowledge of, her constitutional duties.

    I asked her whether this was a criminal action or a civil action. She replied, “It’s hard to explain it in those terms.” I asked whether she intended to proceed under criminal procedural rules or in civil procedure. We would proceed under the “rules of criminal procedure,” she answered because this is a criminal case. I asked when I could expect to be charged, indicted, or have a probable cause determination. She replied that none of those events would occur because this is “a civil action.” So I could expect to be served with a complaint? No, no. As she had already explained, we would proceed under the criminal rules.

    (For the record, the Montgomery City Attorney never studied law with me.)

    She asserted that I had violated the “rules of the road” and explained, “You were caught on camera speeding.” I asked her for any evidence. She replied that she did not need evidence. I was deemed liable because an automobile that I own “was caught speeding.” But the complaint is against me, I noted, not my car. But I am liable, she insisted, because I loaned my vehicle to “someone who speeds.”

    I asked where in the laws it prohibits me from loaning my vehicle, and how I am to know in advance that any particular person is going to speed using my car. Agitated by my “semantics,” she advised me to raise any due process issues with the trial court.

    [*click*]

    This was going to be fun.

    The Trial

    Before the trial, I moved to dismiss the case. I wanted the judge to pay attention, so I tried to make the motion interesting. Okay, maybe “interesting” isn’t the best word. It was over the top. I alluded to Hobbes and Locke. I quoted the Declaration of Independence. I suggested the success of the American experiment was at stake. I resorted to superlatives. You know: all the stuff I teach my law students never to do.

    We proceeded to trial. The city produced one witness, the police officer who had signed the affidavit. On direct examination, he explained how the traffic camera system works. A corporation in another state called American Traffic Solutions operates the camera system, chooses the photographs on which to predicate enforcement, recommends the Montgomery police department initiate an action against a vehicle’s owner, and is paid for its work.

    On cross-examination, I established that:

    - He was not present at the time of the alleged violation.

    - He has no photographic evidence of the driver.

    - There were no witnesses.

    - He does not know where Adam MacLeod was at the time of the alleged violation.

    And so on. I then asked the question one is taught never to ask on cross—the last one. “So, you signed an affidavit under the pains and penalties of perjury alleging probable cause to believe that Adam MacLeod committed a violation of traffic laws without any evidence that was so?”

    Without hesitating he answered, “Yes.” This surprised both of us. It also surprised the judge, who looked up from his desk for the first time. A police officer had just testified under oath that he perjured himself in service to a city government and a mysterious, far-away corporation whose officers probably earn many times his salary.

    The city then rested its case. I renewed my motion to dismiss, which the judge immediately granted.

    Vindication! Well, sort of. When I tried to recover my doubled appeal bond, I was told that the clerk was not authorized to give me my money. Naturally, the law contains no procedure for return of the bond and imposes on the court no duty to return it. I was advised to write a motion. Weeks later, when the court still had not ruled on my motion, I was told I could file a motion asking for a ruling on my earlier motion. Bowing to absurdity, I did so. Still nothing has happened now several months later.

    Why This Matters

    Traffic camera laws are popular in part because they appeal to a law-and-order impulse. If we are going to stop those nefarious evildoers who jeopardize the health of the republic by sliding through yellow lights when no one else is around and driving through empty streets at thirty miles per hour in twenty-five zones, then we need a way around such pesky impediments as a lack of eyewitnesses.

    Yet traffic cameras do not always produce probable cause that a particular person has committed a crime. To get around this “problem” (as a certain law-and-order president-elect might call it), several states have created an entirely novel phylum of law: the civil violation of a criminal prohibition. Using this nifty device, a city can charge you of a crime without any witnesses, without any probable cause determination, and without any civil due process.

    In short, municipal officials and their private contractors have at their disposal the powers of both criminal and civil law and are excused from the due process duties of both criminal and civil law. It’s a neat trick that would have made King George III blush.

    Standing and the Fundamentals of Constitutionalism

    Equally troubling is that the municipality is authorized to make the owner answer a civil suit without any standing. Standing is a requirement for a person who wishes to enlist a state’s judicial power against another person. No fellow citizen can haul you into court without first alleging that you wrongly caused some particular injury to that person.

    A city cannot lawfully do to you what your fellow citizen cannot do to you. And it has no standing if it has suffered no particular injury. If a driver rolls through a yellow light at an empty intersection and fails to cross the line before the light turns red, no one is injured, least of all the city.

    In my case, the City Attorney argued that my city has standing because someone exceeded the speed limit while driving my car and thereby breached his or her duty to obey the law. Certainly, all citizens have a duty not to break criminal laws with culpable intent. But we owe that duty neither to the city nor to the state but to each other. If we breach the duty, the city prosecutes on behalf of the people and must afford us criminal due process.

    That is American Constitutionalism 101.

    The Mayor

    The story continues. Lovers of liberty in Alabama kept political pressure on the state legislature, and earlier this year the legislature repealed the traffic-camera law. Yet Montgomery’s defiant mayor announced that the city would continue to operate the program. Curiously, he asserted that to stop issuing tickets would breach the city’s contract with American Traffic Solutions. One wonders how many tickets the city is contractually obligated to issue.

    Finally, after the Attorney General told him to knock off the foolishness, the mayor backed down. Sort of. The city will no longer use car-based cameras, though it will continue to use stationary cameras mounted at intersections. In a fit of petulance, and belying his insistence that the program is motivated by safety concerns rather than revenue, the mayor announced that the amounts of fines for ordinary traffic violations will now be tripled.

    A Small Inconvenience, a Big Problem for Self-Government

    Traffic-camera laws seem like such minor, insignificant intrusions on liberty that few grasp their constitutional significance. But they reflect a profoundly mistaken view of American constitutionalism. One might say that the traffic camera is a sign of our times. Its widespread use and acceptance reveals how far we have drifted from our fundamental commitment to self-government. When our governing officials dismiss due process as mere semantics, when they exercise powers they don’t have and ignore duties they actually bear, and when we let them get away with it, we have ceased to be our own rulers.

    Adam MacLeod is an associate professor at Faulkner University’s Thomas Goode Jones School of Law and author of Property and Practical Reason (Cambridge University Press).


    http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2017/01/18093/
     
    JayDubya, gringott, GOLDBRIX and 3 others like this.
  2. historyrepete

    historyrepete Silver Member Silver Miner

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2013
    Messages:
    1,343
    Likes Received:
    1,416
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    driving thru flyover
    Oh boy, couple paragraphs into it and I'm hooked! I haven't got time to read it yet.
     
    michael59 and gringott like this.
  3. Bigjon

    Bigjon Silver Member Silver Miner Site Supporter ++

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2010
    Messages:
    1,760
    Likes Received:
    1,546
    Trophy Points:
    113
    He won and still lost his money.
     
    JayDubya, michael59, gringott and 5 others like this.
  4. mayhem

    mayhem Другая перспектива Silver Miner Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2010
    Messages:
    2,737
    Likes Received:
    3,092
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    South Dixie
    Well IT IS all about the money.
     
  5. historyrepete

    historyrepete Silver Member Silver Miner

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2013
    Messages:
    1,343
    Likes Received:
    1,416
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    driving thru flyover
    What a trite response. Don't you post a lot about sovereignty and big government over reach? Yet you mock this and make his actions seem trivial.
     
  6. BarnacleBob

    BarnacleBob GIM Founding Member & Mod. Founding Member Site Mgr Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2012
    Messages:
    8,235
    Likes Received:
    9,197
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Ten-Oh-Cee
    LMAO.... "Traffic Court"!

    What is TRAFFIC?

    Commerce; trade; dealings in merchandise, bills, money, and the like. See Iu re Insurance Co. (D. C.) 96 Fed. 757; Levine v. State, 35 Tex. Cr. R. 647. 34 S. W. 960; Feople v. Hamilton, 17 Misc. Rep. 11, 39 N. Y. Supp. 531; Merriam v. Langdon, 10 Conn. 471. (Blacks Law Dictionary)

    http://thelawdictionary.org/traffic/

    From the article:

    "I asked her whether this was a criminal action or a civil action. She replied, “It’s hard to explain it in those terms.” I asked whether she intended to proceed under criminal procedural rules or in civil procedure. We would proceed under the “rules of criminal procedure,” she answered because this is a criminal case. I asked when I could expect to be charged, indicted, or have a probable cause determination. She replied that none of those events would occur because this is “a civil action.” So I could expect to be served with a complaint? No, no. As she had already explained, we would proceed under the criminal rules.

    In short, municipal officials and their private contractors have at their disposal the powers of both criminal and civil law and are excused from the due process duties of both criminal and civil law. "

    "TRAFFIC COURT IS A PRIVATE CIVIL COMMERCIAL COURT!" Traffic is commerce!

    This was an ad hoc summary proceeding in the PRIVATE "civil" jurisdiction of law merchant (lex merchatoria). “It’s hard to explain it in those terms.” Damn right it is, cause once you understand "law merchant" you can defend yourself.

    Law Merchant is a private civil equity proceeding. The civil law of equity does not include criminal penalties, law merchant does! Thats the tip-off, when they say its a "civil proceeding that carries criminal penalties" you automatically KNOW your in a private law merchant ad hoc summary proceeding. Secondly, law merchant operates outside of the constitutions & constitutional protections, hence "due process" doesnt apply in law merchant! Most traffic laws & courts lack due process in toto.
    Thats the second indicator that your not in a judicial power court, but a private civil action. Thirdly these are not judicial criminal proceedings as there is never a court reporter on the record... same as any civil proceeding! Fourthly, in a judicial criminal proceeding the state must prove your guilty of a crime, in law merchant the defendant is presumed to be in dishonor (guilty) and must prove being innocent of dishonor.

    These private civil courts blend & bend the rules of both civil & criminal procedure to keep the law merchant hidden from view. In most jurisdictions these private commercial proceedings use "Roberts Rules of Order" to conduct the fleecing.

    In U.S. polity & law, law merchant has two names, 1. Public Policy & 2. The Uniform Commercial Code.

    Below is a wonderful primer that explains the scam...

    "The Dispatch of Merchants"

    http://famguardian.org/Subjects/Taxes/Articles/DispatchOfMerchants.htm#INTRODUCTION
     
    gringott, TRYNEIN and Goldhedge like this.
  7. Bigjon

    Bigjon Silver Member Silver Miner Site Supporter ++

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2010
    Messages:
    1,760
    Likes Received:
    1,546
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Wow, I post a short synopsis and you go off half cocked, making up bullshit that is not there.
     
    gringott likes this.
  8. Uglytruth

    Uglytruth Gold Member Gold Chaser

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2011
    Messages:
    3,357
    Likes Received:
    3,908
    Trophy Points:
    113
    With everything being digital & trackable....... I wonder if there is a program that searches your plate number & ties it to your banking records, credit report or spending habits and rates your ability to pay a nuisance ticket.
    Hey that's Dr. Joe..... he can afford to pay. Hey it's Tom & he has a credit score of 796...... he's good for a few bucks........
     
    GOLDBRIX likes this.
  9. GOLDBRIX

    GOLDBRIX God,Donald Trump,most in GIM2 I Trust. OTHERS-meh Site Supporter Platinum Bling

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2010
    Messages:
    4,427
    Likes Received:
    4,001
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    U.t., They are all accessible to the LEOs of the locality. It may not spew out in or on one easy to read form but it can be had with some study time. Alot of criminals are caught this way but in Court it comes across as Good Police Work.

    There should be a way / law suit that he should be able to get his money back or file a personal lawsuit on the Mayor for Dereliction of Duty or Malfeasance of Office.
     
    gringott likes this.
  10. BarnacleBob

    BarnacleBob GIM Founding Member & Mod. Founding Member Site Mgr Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2012
    Messages:
    8,235
    Likes Received:
    9,197
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Ten-Oh-Cee
    Take for instance "roadside confiscations" of cash & other goods... a complete lack of due process and its all committed under the civil law of law merchant. Your trafficking in traffic in a commercial vehicle, only commercial vehicles require a state title, registration & tags, your also carrying a commercial driver license (all dl's are various classes of commercial operators license) when your instantly detained and when the officer discovers $5000 in cash on the front seat he confiscates it as a civil forfeiture from your commercial vehicle. He created an instant "private" civil claim on the cash... If you want it back you must sue his CLAIM in his private civil court using his rules. Good luck! Its all perpetuated using law merchant.... Almost ALL state & federal statutes are commercial... and their scope has been traditionally been aimed at regulating a special & specific, not general class of commercial subjects, objects or activities... However, using law merchant the legislatures & their agents have been able to expand their reach into all areas of activities. All they need do is create a private civil case against the victim in commerce.... and the word TRAFFIC is key.

    What is TRAFFIC?

    Commerce; trade; dealings in merchandise, bills, money, and the like.

    Do deal in merchandise, bills, money & the like? Of course you do... you buy groceries, gasoline, electricity, & clothing, etc. (dealing in merchandise) and you pay for these items with bills (debt) or money (coins) and the like (bank accounts, checks, money orders, credit cards, credit, etc.). In the perverted eyes of the law, YOU ARE A MERCHANT! And merchants & their activities are the object & subject of civil commerce and the private civil jurisdiction of law merchant. And BTW, thats exactly what the yellow fringed flag represents, law merchant!
     
    Bigjon and Goldhedge like this.
  11. Bigjon

    Bigjon Silver Member Silver Miner Site Supporter ++

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2010
    Messages:
    1,760
    Likes Received:
    1,546
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The price of being a US Citizen:
    Dear Dr. Trowbridge…..
    Posted on January 18, 2017by David Robinson
    [​IMG] Judge Anna von Reitz

    Dear Dr. Trowbridge…..

    The Final Straw from Dr. John Parks Trowbridge: https://supremecourtcase.wordpress.com

    I want all of my readers to read this updated posting from Dr. Trowbridge. For the past three years, he has been dueling with the so-called “federal courts” which are indeed nothing more than corporate municipal courts and are not vested with any authority related to us, our states, or our judicial powers.

    Dr. Trowbridge has exposed the seedy underbelly of the “UNITED STATES” incorporated, which is nothing but a private, for-profit, mostly foreign-owned governmental services corporation operated by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) on our shores, and he has also exposed the treasonous “Oath Tampering” of its Board of Directors, masquerading as members of a legitimate and lawfully organized “Congress” in 1991.

    Indeed, John Parks Trowbridge has fought the good fight.

    The one aspect of this circumstance which he has not taken into consideration is that all their actions against him and against other Americans depend upon falsification of public records (Birth Certificates) enabling these Grifters to “presume” that we are all “voluntarily submitting” to their municipal jurisdiction and that we are not owed the guarantees of the actual Constitution as a result.

    We are not now and the vast majority of us have never been either “United States Citizens” (Territorial Citizens) nor “citizens of the United States” (Municipal CITIZENS)—but our names have been “registered” as such and we have been falsely held under the legal presumptions that apply in that foreign international jurisdiction as a result.

    Unable to change or overcome our actual Constitution, the treasonous corporate vermin have instead connived to mischaracterize each one of us and to falsely claim that we have knowingly and willingly volunteered to serve as “citizens” in their “democracy” instead of living as non-citizen American state nationals in the republic we are owed.

    And that fundamental fraud is what underlies all that Dr. Trowbridge and many other honest Americans have detected and experienced. These dishonest “courts” are not offering to try John Parks Trowbridge, but a corporate franchise ACCOUNT named after him: JOHN PARKS TROWBRIDGE or a bankrupt public utility franchise ACCOUNT also named after him: JOHN P. TROWBRIDGE by the perpetrators of this vast, convoluted scheme.

    Congressional Record: June 13, 1967, pp. 15641-15646—— “A “citizen of the United States” is a civilly dead entity operating as a co-trustee and co-beneficiary of the PCT (Public Charitable Trust set up for the welfare of freed plantation slaves in the wake of the Civil War), the private constructive, cestui que vie trust of US Inc. under the 14th Amendment, which upholds the debt of the USA and US Inc. in Section 4.

    There— once and for all — in plain English— is what a “citizen of the United States” is: a dead legal fiction entity presumed to be operating as a recipient of federal corporation welfare benefits in exchange for guaranteeing (underwriting and acting as a surety for) the debts of both the USA, Inc. and the US, Inc.

    There, too, is the explanation of how you are being enslaved and “presumed upon” by these vermin. As a “citizen of the United States” you are on the hook for paying their debts and presumed to be operating a public trust franchise, a Cestui Que Vie constructive trust named after you under the JOHN PARKS TROWBRIDGE ACCOUNT or to be a bankrupt public transmitting utility franchise operating under the JOHN P. TROWBRIDGE ACCOUNT.

    These criminals are getting away with these frauds and deceits and operating these “courts” as private debt collection agencies in behalf of the creditors of “JOHN PARKS TROWBRIDGE” (benefiting the US, Inc.) and “JOHN P.TROWBRIDGE” (which isn’t even a legal name for lack of specificity, benefiting the USA, Inc.) under color of law.

    This has been going on for 150 years, ever since the close of the so-called “American Civil War” which was never declared and which was never ended by any peace treaty and which is, therefore, nothing but an illegal and illicit commercial mercenary action on our shores.

    They have usurped upon our rightful jurisdiction—-the land and the undelegated portion of international jurisdiction, too—and promoted global enslavement and false indebtedness–via the pernicious practice of registering people as “things”—- Cestui Que Vie trusts and bankrupt public transmitting utility franchises—without the victim’s knowledge or consent. They seize upon us when we are babies in our cradles, force our Mothers to sign undisclosed contracts, and register our given names as franchises of corporations indebted to them.

    And, because there is no law against enslaving a corporate fiction or robbing a corporate fiction or falsely arresting a corporate fiction, they have made very merry on our shores, operating this con game and substituting their private corporation for the public government we are owed.

    Doctor Trowbridge, you are wasting your time making arguments “in Law” against vermin operating “at law”. In their fraudulent system of things, JOHN PARKS TROWBRIDGE has already consented to their municipal jurisdiction and submitted his body, soul, and any other assets he may have or earn to serve their benefit and not his own. In their fraudulent system of things, JOHN PARKS TROWBRIDGE has owed an insurmountable debt from the day of his birth—which is not the day you were born, but the date your given name was registered (filed) as property belonging to them and offered for the benefit of their creditors. In their fraudulent, foreign system of things, JOHN PARKS TROWBRIDGE is — by definition — a criminal, already convicted, and all that is left for them to discuss is how much he owes their masters and how long they may put him in jail.

    And now, without further adieu, may we all agree that the Pope and the British Monarch and the Lord Mayor of London, all of whom have acted in Gross International Breach of Trust with respect to the America people since 1822, are to be recognized as criminals for creating and promoting and using and abusing this system of fraud and mischaracterization and operating it throughout the world? That they are to be universally condemned for the practice of preying upon helpless babies and alleging false and self-interested contracts against them and their parents?

    Yes.

    Dear Doctor Trowbridge, I could weep for the beauty of your logic and your research, because except for the erudition of the ignorant concerning what should be honored by any honest court— I know it is beyond hope to expect these private bill collection agencies being run as courts under color of law to respond to your complaint.

    Even among the Bar Association Members bright enough to understand what you are saying, there isn’t the courage or the honor or the strength of character necessary for these men and women to denounce what has gone on here. To do so would be to admit their own guilt and without the power to guarantee their safety, you cannot expect them to yield. At most, you may expect a private settlement and the dismissal of any charges held against you, the return of your house, and a quick sideways scuttle like cockroaches fleeing the light.

    And that, I think, is not your object, Sir. I think that you, like me, are determined to see the correction of this entire system of things and that nothing but an end to business as usual for these con artists will do.
     
  12. Joe King

    Joe King Gold Member Gold Chaser

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2010
    Messages:
    3,329
    Likes Received:
    3,134
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Instant Gratification Land
    Bob, the problem is that everyone with a drivers license originally submitted an application asking for one and by signing on the dotted line, agreed to be bound by the traffic code. Of which, traffic court is a part.
    ...but then want to somehow renig on their word when they are expected to comply. Ie: can't have both ways. No eating of cake and having it too will be permitted.

    Or do you dispute that virtually everyone holding one, asked to be issued a DL?
     
    gringott likes this.
  13. BarnacleBob

    BarnacleBob GIM Founding Member & Mod. Founding Member Site Mgr Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2012
    Messages:
    8,235
    Likes Received:
    9,197
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Ten-Oh-Cee
    IN ANSWER: The so called annual Internal Revenue Tax is called a "voluntary tax", it is enforced as a compulsory "excise" tax using the principles of law merchant. Theres nothing voluntary about it, as most economic participants would never voluntarily contribute to the tax scheme if it was truly a voluntary tax.

    Same applies to the DL scam! Is it not true that most travelers loathe the DHSMV (Dept Highway Safety & Motor Vehicles) licensing bureau, secondly most would rather not participate in the annual registration & tag tax schemes if given the choice. Theres nothing "voluntary" in the nature of the DL scam, it too is enforced as a compulsory tax to use the roads.

    Same may also be said of the personnel real property & ad valorem tax schemes on private abodes... If given the choice, most would voluntarily "opt out." Which means there is nothing VOLUNTARY about any of these regulatory tax & revenue scams....

    If these scams were truly designed for the purpose of highway & road safety, a person would take the DHSMV written & road test ONCE, to insure the operator was qualified to safely operate the machine. A registration & plate would be purchased ONCE, not annually.

    Arguendo for the moment, lets say I purchase a license to operate a personal or even a commercial vehicle. I agree to abide by the "rules of the road" at the time I signed for the license, nothing more, nothing less! Oh but wait, the legislatures & the DHSMV are constantly updating the rules of the road called commercial statutes with all kinds of new candy man regulations. My licensing agreement & my acceptance was based upon the current rules... My agreement is essentially voided when they altered the rules w/o my consent and further w/o providing me with proper notification of the alterations & changes.

    Now your very MISTAKEN if you think or believe the myth that speed limit, stop lights & signage are LAWS, they most certainly are not! All of these devices are erected & regulated by the DHSMV which is an office of the Executive (Governor). Only the Legislature is authorized to enact laws, it is the duty of the executive branch to enforce the legislatures laws. This is known as the "separation of powers" doctrine. To wit;

    "The powers of the state government shall be divided into legislative, executive and judicial branches. No person belonging to one branch shall exercise any powers appertaining to either of the other branches unless expressly provided herein." -- Article II, sec. 3 Fl. Constitution

    The only authorized sharing of power can be found in the Governors option to grant pardons & clemency. IOW none of the 3 branches are authorized to exercise the other powers, exxcepting the Governors executive power to grant clemency & pardons.

    The DHSMV is a administrative branch of the executive office. It sets speed limits & signage, along with signal lights, etc... a.k.a. it invents the regulations concerning things like speeds, u-turns, stop signs, etc... It is unconstitutionally usurping the Legislatures powers in violation of the "separation of powers" doctrine... These are NOT laws, color of law maybe, but not law!

    The Florida Constitution sets forth the forms & solemnities required to create a law. To wit;

    "Laws.—Every law shall embrace but one subject and matter properly connected therewith, and the subject shall be briefly expressed in the title. No law shall be revised or amended by reference to its title only. Laws to revise or amend shall set out in full the revised or amended act, section, subsection or paragraph of a subsection. The enacting clause of every law shall read: “Be It Enacted by the Legislature of the State of Florida:”." --Article III, section 6

    Thus pursuant Article III, sec 6 (supra) it is axiomatic that these these signs, etc. et al are NOT laws! Yet they are assuming & usurping the position of law. Needless to say this represents the commercial side of .gov, ergo an illicit 4th branch of gov performing acts that it is barred to engage in under the constitutions!

    There is an endless list I could recite concerning how wrong the DL & other state scams are completely unconstitutional & enforced via stress & duress by the state police & civil power, but I digress!

    The argument that applicants are voluntarily applying to pay license, registration, plates & a host of other taxes also fails & falls on its very face, as in 99% of these cases they are engaging in these activities under severe duress, namely with threats of incarceration, fines, fees and/or confiscation of their property to comply.... And to add insult to injury, the state even violates its own law merchant statutes. All contracts & agreements including state & private license schemes per the UCC, state & federal laws must be entered into knowingly, voluntarily, and intentionally or it is unenforceable, moot, null & void ab initio.... Remember that one of the requirements of a contract or an agreement to perform is full disclosure. Secondly, as previously stated the civil license agreements are under constant change without notification....

    There is innumerable case law that supports a persons constitutional rights to travel the public roads to conduct his personal business without a state titled vehicle, registration, plates & a DL.... The state fails to disclose these facts in & at law... they're practicing fraud, theft by deception, numerous violations of law merchant & the constitutional protections and using duress & threats of the police power to compel performance and your trying to tell me its voluntary...An absurdity on its very face...

    Case Laws on Traveling w/o a DL

    http://wearechange.org/u-s-supreme-...o-drive-automobile-on-public-highwaysstreets/
     
    arminius likes this.
  14. Joe King

    Joe King Gold Member Gold Chaser

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2010
    Messages:
    3,329
    Likes Received:
    3,134
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Instant Gratification Land
    Oh but it is voluntary Bob. The problem is that the "voluntary" part was in accepting and using a SS#

    You of all people should be aware that what we know as "personal income tax" was started during WW2 as the victory tax. People were encouraged to contribute to the war effort, but to do so required a #. So what do you think patriotic feeling people did? They voluntarily applied for a # and didn't think much about it.
    ...but once you delare yourself subject to pay SS tax, it creates a liability for income tax on the same dollar amount earned as SS wages. Ie: it becomes legally enforceable. Especially when you send them a document you signed under penalty of perjury declaring that you owe it.

    If I sent you a sworn statement signed under penalty of perjury that I owed you $10,000, you wouldn't try to collect? Well how do think the gov should react to receiving such a statement? They act on the data you provided.


    Bob, the problem you rightfully see today, is one of being surrounded by people who for generations now have been "volunteering" without question and therefor have created an environment where it's become a de-facto requirement just to conduct business in a manner that most of society has become accustomed to.


    It's kinda like how FDR's emergency war powers, or in more modern times, the so-called patriot act has come to change the Peoples relationship with their gov. They do something that's intended to deal with a problem, but somewhere never leave open a door to go back to how gov operated previously once the problem is resolved. After awhile, it just becomes the new normal operating procedure.
    ...and the People have so far gone along with. Albeit with a few kicking and screaming and everyone else looking at them as though they're nutz.

    Welcome to the Matrix Bob! We've been expecting you! I take it your favorite color is red?


    But it is also voluntary. There's nothing that imposes a blanket requirement to apply for a DL.
    ...but once you do, you become bound be the traffic code. I guarantee that if you read what you signed, it includes you agreeing to be bound by it, as the DL itself is a creation of the Code.

    Again, what you are seeing is the fact you are surrounded by people who for generations have been ceding their Rights to gov and at this point it makes it very hard to not go along with it.

    I'm not saying it's right, just trying to explain how we got to this point that you can so readily see.
    ...and I admit that it is quite the pickle we as a society have gotten ourselves into. At least relative to our Rights as originally intended.

    Other than education, and an over-all mind shift by a sufficient number of people, I don't know what the answer is.


    This stuff works on the assumption that everyone is in the system and has ceded certain Rights to the gov.


    Why would you take any test if you are not a person required to? By submitting to it, you create the liability to be bound by it. No having your cake and eating it too. If you want your full Rights, quit ceding them to the State.


    Sorry, but that's not how it works. That's kinda like only wanting to abide by laws that were on the books as of the day you were born.
    No, when you asked for a DL you signed agreeing to be bound by changes to the code. I'll guarantee you that verbiage is in there somewhere. If it wasn't, any two bit lawyer worth his two bits would have argued that point and won years ago.


    What if the Legislature delegates authority over certain things to the Executive?
    What do you think Congress did in 1933? Yep, exactly that. They delegated (or ceded, however you wanna look at it) certain power to the Executive.
    Not sayin' it was the right move, just saying what happened.


    No they are not "laws", but rather regulations.
    ...and it is regulations that enforce the law.

    For example, the Legislature can very well enact a law that charges the Executive to promulgate rules and regulations covering a specific subject. Like traffic safety, for example. The Executive then instructs the appropriate agency of gov to create regulations that spell out rules intended for the safe movement of traffic. This does not mean that the Legislature must enact specific laws for each and every thing that might become a rule. Those details are up to the Executive branch agency charged with implementing the law.

    That said, if the Legislature is not happy with the regulations, they have the power to review the regulations in order to make sure they do not exceed the scope of the original law.


    Bob, I agree that things are not right, but again the problem is that all these things have become virtual requirements, but only because so many have blindly gone along to get along. It's an unfortunate situation and has effectively removed the living generation from having any direct connection to the Founders original intent for the People of our nation.
    Most people alive today would not recognize a wholly Constitutional gov as was intended by our Founders. It would seem strange and foreign to them. There's no living memory of it.

    To not have that happen requires an ever vigilant populace with an attention span long enough to be able to keep a check on gov power. That hasn't happened in a very long time.

    Edited to add:"...a Republic, if you can keep it." Well, you obviously can't and didn't.


    Now Bob, about them Van Allen Belts.....
     
    Last edited: Jan 19, 2017
  15. GOLDBRIX

    GOLDBRIX God,Donald Trump,most in GIM2 I Trust. OTHERS-meh Site Supporter Platinum Bling

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2010
    Messages:
    4,427
    Likes Received:
    4,001
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Us "Boomers" may have been the last generation that "signed-up" FOR S.S. Numbers.

    I know my kids were placed in the SS Admin. by the hospital they were born in. About three weeks after they were born we received their SSN Cards.
     
  16. michael59

    michael59 heads up-butts down Platinum Bling

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2014
    Messages:
    5,392
    Likes Received:
    2,168
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    20 years logging
    Location:
    on the low side of corporate Oregon
    I just love the "fictitious plaintiff," I really do. It's how I shut that judge down. In fact I might be jinxing myself by admitting this but I have been waiting for his usual contempt hearing but as I voided his last attempt at a impaired contract I find myself still waiting....open, open, open.... kind of like that commercial.

    As of this moment I am contemplating kidnapping charges because of standing. Standing as explained in this article and this judge did nor does have it.
     
  17. Joe King

    Joe King Gold Member Gold Chaser

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2010
    Messages:
    3,329
    Likes Received:
    3,134
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Instant Gratification Land
    You actually signed for it in the hospital. It's not issued automatically. An ss-5 must still be submitted.

    The problem is that it's become so accepted and so routine that it's been reduced to just another piece of paper you're asked to sign at the time.
    ...and most people do so without question or much notice of it at all. Not to mention the fact most people need their kids to have numbers in order to get the deduction on their taxes.

    If you refuse to sign it, that's when they really start giving you the hard sell on it.

    What we have now is just the end result of multiple generations having blindly volunteered in order to gain benefit of gov.
     
    historyrepete and GOLDBRIX like this.
  18. GOLDBRIX

    GOLDBRIX God,Donald Trump,most in GIM2 I Trust. OTHERS-meh Site Supporter Platinum Bling

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2010
    Messages:
    4,427
    Likes Received:
    4,001
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    [​IMG]
     

Share This Page