RE: Common-law Right to Travel

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

RE: Common-law Right to Travel

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Common-law Right to Travel

Page: << < prev 8 9 10 [11] 12 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Common-law Right to Travel - 1/31/2010 1:51:04 PM

Termyn8or

Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline

Fine Steel. If that's enough proof for you, pay your tribute and rentes. And obey, whatever they say.

Do not ask where the word rentes came from here.

T

(in reply to GotSteel)

Profile

Post #: 201

RE: Common-law Right to Travel - 1/31/2010 2:35:49 PM

DomKen

Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline

I like how you dismiss proof that the claims made in this thread aren't some magic bullet that lets people drive without license, registration or insurance. In short those two morons tried what you claim is true and lost.

(in reply to Termyn8or)

Profile

Post #: 202

RE: Common-law Right to Travel - 1/31/2010 9:59:29 PM

Termyn8or

Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline

Ken. now you've gone too far. You've accused two people of being morons without ever having met them or spoken to them. All you know is that they fought the gov. And how is an acquittal a loss ? Rather have a felony record for something that did not hurt anyone ? Something they just say is bad ? And the other guy was old, they did not kill him and now they can't kill his car. I bet he's laughing in his grave right now. They stood up for their rights, something which you will obviouslty never understand. You don't understand the principles involved.

You seem to know the "code" and the "statutes", but you have no fucking understanding of the body nor the spirit of the real fucking law in this country and I doubt you ever will. After chance after chance to even think of the possibility that you don't know every fucking thing in the world, you consistently prove yourself to small mided and stubborn as a rock. And I say that because I don't want to insult mules.

One moron as you call him lived a half decent life and died without ever giving in, always fighting for his rights to the very end. The other Ken proclaimed moron has bounced back from his quarter million dollar loss and is back in the thick of things and still not paying a dime in income tax while they know right where he is. I respect that. Each of them had tiutorial sessions with retired law professors and Constitutional law experts and it took years of study to get where they are. I respect that.

I was always ahead of the pack, I went to special schools and still got out of there to get a real education, I learned to learn. I stopped calling people stupid because one day I did call someone stupid who really was and it was explained to me that it was a slur, hitting below the belt so to speak because maybe they couldn't help it. Since then I have been very reluctant to call anyone stupid (except on the gun control issue).

Therefore I will not call you stupid.

T

(in reply to DomKen)

Profile

Post #: 203

RE: Common-law Right to Travel - 1/31/2010 10:51:58 PM

DomKen

Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline

WTF are you talking about? The two morons in question are alive and the one who was driving was found guilty and was fined and ordered by the court to get a icense etc. or stop driving. You might want to try watching the videos again.

As to calling people stupid or morons, I reserve it for those who are ignorant or gullible enough to fall for this sort of idiocy. You think you are somehow superior, and are a bigot of the worst sort, but you still spout this crap. In my book that makes you suspect. Either you know you're full of shit or you're too deluded and ignorant to see through the bullshit. I've told you repeatedly to drop the amorphus claims of superior knowledge which you can't support. I've called you out on it in this thread and you couldn't produce one tiny shred of evidence in support of your delusional beliefs, primarily because the proof exists exclusively in your imagination. So I'll repeat put up or shut up.

(in reply to Termyn8or)

Profile

Post #: 204

RE: Common-law Right to Travel - 1/31/2010 11:43:04 PM

Termyn8or

Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline

You got a date. We have to agree on the date and time. You come and meet the one who is alive, see his thriving business and his house and all that. I'm sure he can find that IRS paperwork and I'm sure he would welcome you in as he makes copies for you. Short of that, no proof would be good enough.

Then we can take a ride and have a look at the dead guy's Blazer, still sitting there. We can walk in there and get specific about the Blazer and find out just why it has been there for over ten years.

You can have it from the horse's mouth, I can arrainge it. It will take a bit of scheduling but I am willing to contact these people, in my real phyysical life, who have the actual evidence. No website would ever convince me, and I don't expect it to convince you. Buty I'll take the bet if you are willing to make it. We are talking sometime this year, earlyish, maybe in a couple of months. I can't bring the evidence to you. Even scanning documents id suspect, you need to actually feel the notary stamp in the paper. I will fucking prove it period. And we'll find some interesting stuff in my paper files as well.

If you can't understand the physical impossibility of bringing the real evidence to you, especially electronically, I don't know what to say. Pack some clothes for the trip. Remember once in a while in high profile court cases they have to go to the scene of the crime ? This is like that. I made the offer, and can probably offer you a free place to stay and park for a few days at least. All I have to do is make a few phone calls and it will be gathered up for your personal inspection.

You handle transporting yourself, I will try to be a decent host which might cost me a few bucks. But my credibility is worth it. I have made the offer, do you accept ?

T

(in reply to DomKen)

Profile

Post #: 205

RE: Common-law Right to Travel - 2/1/2010 12:13:42 AM

DomKen

Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline

Why should i travel to you for any reason? If there's a court case then tell me the name and the docket number and I'll get the info myself. That's what is called independently verifiable data which is the only kind I'm interested in. Some impound lot employee blowing smoke up my ass because you asked him to isn't even remotely evidence much less good enough evidence to prove anything.

BTW just to be clear I would never accept hositality from a bigot that you think I would stoop so low is insulting.

< Message edited by DomKen -- 2/1/2010 12:15:20 AM >

(in reply to Termyn8or)

Profile

Post #: 206

RE: Common-law Right to Travel - 2/1/2010 12:34:22 AM

Termyn8or

Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline

Wait, I might be off base here. Videos ? I thought everybody knew that I don't do videos much.

Whatever, I don't care what they did in the videos, I made the offer. I may have erred here, and I will admit it.

Whatever I say, everybody bear this in mind. The success rate against them in traffic court is down to about 2%. Up to 10% might pull this and get reduced charges, but still get convicted of something. Then they get the max sentence for that. You don't fight goliath at the drop of a hat.

The win rate against the IRS is down to 10%. Of course that is amidst a lawyer who claims visits to prostitutes as a medical deduction. Perhaps they call it prostrate milking ? Many win, and recently case law was made that certain tuitions are tax deductible. That happened recently. Lori Singleton-Clarke won, and what made it more newsworthy was the fact that she represented herself pro se. Overall though, people who beat the IRS have not filed, well over half. This case was significant in other ways though.

Y'all may think this is intermingling the tax situation with the driving situation, but I didn't do it. They did. They tax the roads that we paid for.

On another interesting note, afoot in Texas is a move to privatize the highways. Every road will be a toll road once they are sold to private entities. It's being promoted in part by Rothchild NM, so it might just happen. I know it is ridiculous, but they are posturing for it in more states than just Texas. This might be another urban wet dream or whatever they call it. But really if the public roads come under private ownership, what now ?

This is about the same as those other crackpot theories, like charging per email because it is costing the post office money, and charging people rent for their own cash anytime it is out of the bank. While all these schemes are probably deadenders, we didn't make them up, they did. In each case there is consideration, or weight given to these schemes in our belloved government. Shit like this never goes through, but..................

From this perspective think of intellectual property rights. Copright a song and it lasted a bunch of years but then was in what's called public domain. Well somebody has bought alot of what was in public domain, so where is my check ? Likewise if they sell our roads, shouldn't we get the money ?

In minor ways though, things like this can and do happen, albeit not all the time. But somehow public domain went out the window so fast nobody even saw it.

Not even me. I am more concerned about what happens if people don't fight, than what happens if they do.

T

(in reply to Termyn8or)

Profile

Post #: 207

RE: Common-law Right to Travel - 2/1/2010 9:22:07 AM

Termyn8or

Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline

OK Ken. I am sorry for tearing into you. Looks like you didn't call my people morons. That's a public apology OK ?

However calling me a bigot might not quite be right. You should see my crowd. There is a difference between what I am and a bigot. Again I think words may be partly at fault here. Like the difference between an engine and a motor. Most people think they are completely synonymous but they are not, and I have met few who can describe the actual difference.

So I was wrong, and have apologized. Publicly. Despite our differences you had one coming.

Having given it some thought, most of our differences are based on what we consider valid evidence and what we do not. I do not see vidoes as evidence, anyone can shoot a video. Cites from law books or court records, well if you take the sheer volume of these documents, you could probably find the body of Shakespeare's work in there if you really look.

In other words, just because they charged a restaurant owner with importing lobsters (now I think I can actually find that one online) it does not mean that it is illegal to import lobsters. It works both ways, from my side of the issue(s) alot of people engange in post hoc ergo propter hoc. This must be avoided.

Have a good day.

T

(in reply to DomKen)

Profile

Post #: 208

RE: Common-law Right to Travel - 2/4/2010 5:44:47 AM

Real0ne

Posts: 21189
Joined: 10/25/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

I like how you dismiss proof that the claims made in this thread aren't some magic bullet that lets people drive without license, registration or insurance. In short those two morons tried what you claim is true and lost.

you know what I like....

I like how you continually distort the topic without making the distinction that has been been made by the courts between driving and travelling and making false inferences they are one in the same with your conflated diatribe.

Whats your point? Can you ever debate without willfully and purposefully mischaracterizing matters?

< Message edited by Real0ne -- 2/4/2010 5:45:45 AM >

_____________________________

"We the Borg" of the us imperialists....resistance is futile

Democracy; The 'People' voted on 'which' amendment?

Yesterdays tinfoil is today's reality!

"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session

(in reply to DomKen)

Profile

Post #: 209

RE: Common-law Right to Travel - 2/4/2010 12:10:12 PM

DomKen

Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

I like how you dismiss proof that the claims made in this thread aren't some magic bullet that lets people drive without license, registration or insurance. In short those two morons tried what you claim is true and lost.

you know what I like....

I like how you continually distort the topic without making the distinction that has been been made by the courts between driving and travelling and making false inferences they are one in the same with your conflated diatribe.

Whats your point? Can you ever debate without willfully and purposefully mischaracterizing matters?

No court has made the distinction you claim. I asked you for a court ruling that specifically drew a disticntion between them and you couldn't.

To drive a car on the public way you must conform to local laws in regards to licensing, reoistration and insurance.

(in reply to Real0ne)

Profile

Post #: 210

RE: Common-law Right to Travel - 4/16/2010 3:35:08 PM

Termyn8or

Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline

"You couldn't respond then and you can't defend your claims now. "

Challenging jurisdiction is not as simple as it sounds. Asserting jurisdiction is also not what it seems. You seem to think that all it takes is to draw lines on a map and put up signs that say "CORP LIMIT" instead of Welcome To".

However decades ago a Man who was an Ohio resident was driving through Iowa and got into a minor fender bender. Iwoa had mandatory insurance laws while Ohio did not. The officer on the scene wanted to arrest him but there was also a state trooper on the scene. The state trooper told the officer straight out that if he arrested this Man the he would then arrest him. Their laws are for their people. They cannot apply them to this Man because he was not a resident nor a citizen of Iowa.

You may call me any name you wish, but that Man was my Father. Nobody in my family lies to one another. We just don't operate that way. And there is no reason to make this shit up. And unfortunately of course, there was never a case, therefore there is no case number. But why would I disbelieve my Parents about the account of happenings while the olman was on the road ? Why would they make this up ?

Now think Man, why did they have to let my Father go on his way ? Why does a state trooper who is oathed to enforce the law let a guy go who supposedly broke the "law" ? If you think I made this up, then there is no point in discussing anything wioth you because you won't believe anything unless it comes from the net (and only half of that) or perhaps Fox news ?

Sorry to regurgitate this thread back to the top, but I didn't bring it up, you did. Debunk the FACT that the olman did not go to jail that day.

T

(in reply to DomKen)

Profile

Post #: 211

RE: Common-law Right to Travel - 4/16/2010 7:12:04 PM

luckydawg

Posts: 2448
Joined: 9/2/2009
Status: offline

So you for some reason think being arrested means going to jail?

Your analogy doesn't even hold up.

The penalty for driving without insurance, is a fine, not being arrested and taken to jail.

Nor does being in a traffic accident get a person put in jail

The relevant issue in your anaogly is left out. Did your olman or the other driver cause the wreck? But either way, why would he have been put in jail?

Perhaps he was a dumb paranoid hick, who felt lucky for not getting thrown in jail, for absolutly no reason?

You really are a dumbass, with out even a clue as to what critical thinking is.

It expalins a lot of your posts.

_____________________________

I was posting as Right Wing Hippie, but that account got messed up.

(in reply to Termyn8or)

Profile

Post #: 212

RE: Common-law Right to Travel - 4/16/2010 9:28:48 PM

DomKen

Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Termyn8or

"You couldn't respond then and you can't defend your claims now. "

Challenging jurisdiction is not as simple as it sounds. Asserting jurisdiction is also not what it seems. You seem to think that all it takes is to draw lines on a map and put up signs that say "CORP LIMIT" instead of Welcome To".

However decades ago a Man who was an Ohio resident was driving through Iowa and got into a minor fender bender. Iwoa had mandatory insurance laws while Ohio did not. The officer on the scene wanted to arrest him but there was also a state trooper on the scene. The state trooper told the officer straight out that if he arrested this Man the he would then arrest him. Their laws are for their people. They cannot apply them to this Man because he was not a resident nor a citizen of Iowa.

You may call me any name you wish, but that Man was my Father. Nobody in my family lies to one another. We just don't operate that way. And there is no reason to make this shit up. And unfortunately of course, there was never a case, therefore there is no case number. But why would I disbelieve my Parents about the account of happenings while the olman was on the road ? Why would they make this up ?

Now think Man, why did they have to let my Father go on his way ? Why does a state trooper who is oathed to enforce the law let a guy go who supposedly broke the "law" ? If you think I made this up, then there is no point in discussing anything wioth you because you won't believe anything unless it comes from the net (and only half of that) or perhaps Fox news ?

Sorry to regurgitate this thread back to the top, but I didn't bring it up, you did. Debunk the FACT that the olman did not go to jail that day.

T

People don't get arrested for not having insurance. They get a fine. BTW you should have gone to the trouble of making sure Iowa had mandatory insuranc elaws before Ohio.
http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=JGsPAAAAIBAJ&sjid=1oYDAAAAIBAJ&pg=2435,2935657&dq=iowa+mandatory+vehicle+insurance+history&hl=en

Just stop making shit up.

(in reply to Termyn8or)

Profile

Post #: 213

RE: Common-law Right to Travel - 4/16/2010 10:00:11 PM

Real0ne

Posts: 21189
Joined: 10/25/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

I like how you dismiss proof that the claims made in this thread aren't some magic bullet that lets people drive without license, registration or insurance. In short those two morons tried what you claim is true and lost.

you know what I like....

I like how you continually distort the topic without making the distinction that has been been made by the courts between driving and travelling and making false inferences they are one in the same with your conflated diatribe.

Whats your point? Can you ever debate without willfully and purposefully mischaracterizing matters?

No court has made the distinction you claim. I asked you for a court ruling that specifically drew a disticntion between them and you couldn't.

To drive a car on the public way you must conform to local laws in regards to licensing, reoistration and insurance.

wtf do you think diplomatic immunity is?

The only vehicles that need license in every state I have checked is a commercial vehicle and the legislation, that means stat codes account for that. Just because you dont know about it has nothing to do with it.

I already told you that when these cases are won they simply disappear. Removed from the records.

All that talking you do I am suprized you know so little about the realities of the court system.

and btw if what you say is true I would have been walkin a long time ago. LOL I send in about a 5/8 inch thick stack of paperwork and everything magically disappears. gee imagine that.

oh and double BTW LMAO

The last cop that picked me and threatened to armed assault and kidnapping if I did not give him my name before the case came to trial was "no longer working there".

< Message edited by Real0ne -- 4/16/2010 10:06:19 PM >

_____________________________

"We the Borg" of the us imperialists....resistance is futile

Democracy; The 'People' voted on 'which' amendment?

Yesterdays tinfoil is today's reality!

"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session

(in reply to DomKen)

Profile

Post #: 214

RE: Common-law Right to Travel - 4/16/2010 10:06:35 PM

FatDomDaddy

Posts: 3183
Joined: 1/31/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania

You have the right to travel.... but you do not have the right to use roads that were paid for by the government. The American people collectively decided to build roads and we collectively decided that we want people to know how to operate motor vehicles

No.... the The US and State TAXPAYERS paid for them. Federal and State Government facilitated the spending of the Taxpayers money.

(in reply to juliaoceania)

Profile

Post #: 215

RE: Common-law Right to Travel - 4/16/2010 10:37:55 PM

Dubbelganger

Posts: 200
Joined: 4/9/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
If you cannot exercise your right on the public "common way" and you certainly cannot trespass on private property on the side of the public common way how does one exercise their unalienable right to travel?

Lying as usual. If you want to exercise your right to travel you can. You can walk or ride a bike or horse. You cannot operate a motor vehicle without a license, registration and insurance.

NOW I remember why I had him/her/it on ignore when I was posting as Hippiekinkster.

(in reply to DomKen)

Profile

Post #: 216

RE: Common-law Right to Travel - 4/17/2010 12:19:31 AM

Termyn8or

Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline

Fuck all these other people for the moment Ken. I don't fucking care what you found through Google. Tell me why the cop wanted to arrest the olman and the state trooper prevented it. Fuck all this other bullshit. If you think I made this up I don't know what to tell you.

Why. And the year doesn't matter, because even your best lobbyists aren't going to get laws enacted simultaneously in all states. What happens if someone is caught from another state which diid not require insurance in a state that does ? He was not drunk or anything of the sort, he was not even cited for a moving violation which supports his claim that he was not at fault.

Answer that.

T

(in reply to DomKen)

Profile

Post #: 217

RE: Common-law Right to Travel - 4/17/2010 7:07:45 AM

DomKen

Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline

Termy I can't tell you why a made up cop did or didn't do something in the story you made up.

However in the real world if someone got caught driving uninsured in Iowa after it had mandatory auto insurance then that person would have gotten a ticket and quite possibly had the car impounded because the Ohio registration, which despite your lie did already require mandatory liability insurance on cars, was invalid.

However if your little stage drama played out in some combination of states then nothing would have happened because mandatory insurance laws are tied into vehicle registration so as long as the cops couldn't show that you had moved into the state and was maintaining the old state registration to evade the new states mandatory insurance laws. That's part of the US Constitution where it requires that all states give full faith and credit to the official acts of the other states. Jurisidction would have absolutely nothing to do with the matter.

So your bullshit is still debunked and you are now a very clearly demonstrated liar. Want to make matters worse or are you going to stop this idiocy now?

(in reply to Termyn8or)

Profile

Post #: 218

RE: Common-law Right to Travel - 4/17/2010 12:10:03 PM

Real0ne

Posts: 21189
Joined: 10/25/2004
Status: offline

The only thing I have ever seen you do well is claim to have actually debunked something but then empty claims well the have no weight. no pun intended.

YOu seem to think the way things are handled today are the way they were handled from the begining of time. nice try "bunker"

_____________________________

"We the Borg" of the us imperialists....resistance is futile

Democracy; The 'People' voted on 'which' amendment?

Yesterdays tinfoil is today's reality!

"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session

(in reply to DomKen)

Profile

Post #: 219

RE: Common-law Right to Travel - 4/17/2010 2:55:08 PM

Termyn8or

Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline

Ken, I am not going to quote you for two reasons, I can't find anything worth quoting. You think I am a liar and my Parents are both liars go fuck yourself. We are not that way.

Are you fucking trying to tell me that mandatory insurance laws were passed at the same minute in all states ? Shit, up until the 50s some states didn't even requires a license to drive. Up until a couple of decades ago IIRC Tennesee would issue plates with the presentment of an MSO, which is mutually exclusive to a state issued certificate of title. And what's more he was just passing through, no infractions.

So in my considered opinion it is pretty much futile to respond to you. Please do not insult me again or I shall tear you to threads, pun intended.

T

< Message edited by Termyn8or -- 4/17/2010 2:58:15 PM >

(in reply to DomKen)

Profile

Post #: 220