[Kokomoj0]

I am a newbee to all this too, but it seems to me that a couple things need to be done. It seems reasonable to me (which is not law of course), that first you would need to get a ruling from a higher court in your favor and then you could go after them.

If you just go after them and do not follow due process you woudl be violating their rights and they will come after you for simulatiion of the legal process or paper terrorism.

I am pretty sure he proper methods are first to make a notice of intent with the proper time frame to remedy, then a claim of right with a demand of service.

something along those lines.

I do know its pretty hairy stuff and can easily backfire and land you in jail so be very careful and of course this is for discussion purposes only not to be construed as legal advise.

[Kokomoj0]

Wow and I did a search for it too and nothing came up 🙁

would you please post a link to that page because even after your telling me for some reason I cannot seem to find it?

[Kokomoj0]

Bing wrote on Sep 17 2008, 11:14 AM:

Koko, welcome to the Forums.

You should dig around at Famguardian and SEDM and I think you find that we have already proven that traveling is an unalienable Right.

Short answer, do not register or insure your car or get a driver's license unless you wish to have a driving privilege. It is really pretty simple.

And than carry documents on your person and in your car in case you get stopped by local police.

When you apply for a driver's license, you agree to the adhesion contract known as the state driving laws and you also agree to have your car registered, insured, etc.

Good luck and keep us up to date on your situation

Bing

[post=”5287″][/post]

Hi Bing, thanks for the reply!

Imagine if a couple thousand people from the state had lost licenses and all showed up on the return call list of the secretary of transportation? I think that would raise some eyebrows especially if followed up by petition to the legislature!

[Kokomoj0]

Here is the latest:

I asked what the alternative method or route was that I may operate my vehicle on the road which retains my inalienable rights.

I was informed that the alternative method was to sign my name as prescribed if I want that PRODUCT.

Quote:

An appellate court is not a performing bear, required to dance to each and every tune played on an appeal. Here appellant raises twenty-nine challenges to a judgment of conviction. However, we find the challenges to fit into five categories and will discuss each category. Any of the twenty-nine issues raised and not discussed in any of the five categories can be deemed to lack sufficient merit or importance to warrant individual attention.

Does this strike anyone as incorrect? Is is not a maxim of commercial law that that each challenge be answered with a rebuttal to fulfill the requirements of due process? Appears due process is that which is deemed “important”?

Disclaimer:

Nothing I write btw will be either given or construed as legal advice. Nothing in anyones responses will be construed as legal advice either and this is all for discussion purposes only.