U.S. SUPREME COURT AND OTHER HIGH COURT CITATIONS PROVING THAT NO LICENSE IS NECESSARY FOR NORMAL USE OF AN AUTOMOBILE ON COMMON WAYSYears ago when that Spook from ATS (NJ Mooch) came to visit... he told me about this
(https://media.licdn.com/mpr/mpr/jc/AAEAAQAAAAAAAAODAAAAJDQ4NjYzOTI4LTI5Y2ItNGNiYy04OGNmLTZhZGY0NjhjNTMwOQ.jpg)
Quote"The right of a citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, by horsedrawn carriage, wagon, or automobile, is not a mere privilege which may be permitted or prohibited at will, but a common right which he has under his right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Under this constitutional guaranty one may, therefore, under normal conditions, travel at his inclination along the public highways or in public places, and while conducting himself in an orderly and decent manner, neither interfering with nor disturbing another's rights, he will be protected, not only in his person, but in his safe conduct."
Now NJ Mooch also said that a) you should carry a written copy of that ruling because most cops do not know it and b) this does NOT apply to doing commerce ie driving a truck or delivering pizza. I has a copy of the entire writ but need to look it up again
QuoteThompson v.Smith, 154 SE 579, 11 American Jurisprudence, Constitutional Law, section 329, page 1135 "The right of the 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 the 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 purpose of life and business." -
Thompson vs. Smith, supra.; Teche Lines vs. Danforth, Miss., 12 S.2d 784 "... the right of the citizen to drive on a public street with freedom from police interference... is a fundamental constitutional right" -White, 97 Cal.App.3d.141, 158 Cal.Rptr. 562, 566-67 (1979) "citizens have a right to drive upon the public streets of the District of Columbia or any other city absent a constitutionally sound reason for limiting their access."
Caneisha Mills v. D.C. 2009 "The use of the automobile as a necessary adjunct to the earning of a livelihood in modern life requires us in the interest of realism to conclude that the RIGHT to use an automobile on the public highways partakes of the nature of a liberty within the meaning of the Constitutional guarantees. . ."
Berberian v. Lussier (1958) 139 A2d 869, 872, See also: Schecter v. Killingsworth, 380 P.2d 136, 140; 93 Ariz. 273 (1963). "The right to operate a motor vehicle [an automobile] upon the public streets and highways is not a mere privilege. It is a right of liberty, the enjoyment of which is protected by the guarantees of the federal and state constitutions."
Adams v. City of Pocatello, 416 P.2d 46, 48; 91 Idaho 99 (1966). "A traveler has an equal right to employ an automobile as a means of transportation and to occupy the public highways with other vehicles in common use."
Campbell v. Walker, 78 Atl. 601, 603, 2 Boyce (Del.) 41. "The owner of an automobile has the same right as the owner of other vehicles to use the highway,* * * A traveler on foot has the same right to the use of the public highways as an automobile or any other vehicle."
Simeone v. Lindsay, 65 Atl. 778, 779; Hannigan v. Wright, 63 Atl. 234, 236. "The RIGHT of the citizen to DRIVE on the public street with freedom from police interference, unless he is engaged in suspicious conduct associated in some manner with criminality is a FUNDAMENTAL CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT which must be protected by the courts." People v. Horton 14 Cal. App. 3rd 667 (1971) "The right to make use of an automobile as a vehicle of travel long the highways of the state, is no longer an open question. The owners thereof have the same rights in the roads and streets as the drivers of horses or those riding a bicycle or traveling in some other vehicle."
House v. Cramer, 112 N.W. 3; 134 Iowa 374; Farnsworth v. Tampa Electric Co. 57 So. 233, 237, 62 Fla. 166. "The automobile may be used with safety to others users of the highway, and in its proper use upon the highways there is an equal right with the users of other vehicles properly upon the highways. The law recognizes such right of use upon general principles.
Brinkman v Pacholike, 84 N.E. 762, 764, 41 Ind. App. 662, 666. "The law does not denounce motor carriages, as such, on public ways. They have an equal right with other vehicles in common use to occupy the streets and roads. It is improper to say that the driver of the horse has rights in the roads superior to the driver of the automobile. Both have the right to use the easement."
Indiana Springs Co. v. Brown, 165 Ind. 465, 468. U.S. Supreme Court says No License Necessary To Drive Automobile On Public Highways/Streets No License Is Necessary Copy and Share Freely YHVH.name 2 2 "A highway is a public way open and free to any one who has occasion to pass along it on foot or with any kind of vehicle." Schlesinger v. City of Atlanta, 129 S.E. 861, 867, 161 Ga. 148, 159;
Holland v. Shackelford, 137 S.E. 2d 298, 304, 220 Ga. 104; Stavola v. Palmer, 73 A.2d 831, 838, 136 Conn. 670 "There can be no question of the right of automobile owners to occupy and use the public streets of cities, or highways in the rural districts." Liebrecht v. Crandall, 126 N.W. 69, 110 Minn. 454, 456 "The word 'automobile' connotes a pleasure vehicle designed for the transportation of persons on highways."
-American Mutual Liability Ins. Co., vs. Chaput, 60 A.2d 118, 120; 95 NH 200 Motor Vehicle: 18 USC Part 1 Chapter 2 section 31 definitions: "(6) Motor vehicle. - The term "motor vehicle" means every description of carriage or other contrivance propelled or drawn by mechanical power and used for commercial purposes on the highways..." 10) The term "used for commercial purposes" means the carriage of persons or property for any fare, fee, rate, charge or other consideration, or directly or indirectly in connection with any business, or other undertaking intended for profit. "A motor vehicle or automobile for hire is a motor vehicle, other than an automobile stage, used for the transportation of persons for which remuneration is received."
-International Motor Transit Co. vs. Seattle, 251 P. 120 The term 'motor vehicle' is different and broader than the word 'automobile.'"
-City of Dayton vs. DeBrosse, 23 NE.2d 647, 650; 62 Ohio App. 232 "Thus self-driven vehicles are classified according to the use to which they are put rather than according to the means by which they are propelled" - Ex Parte Hoffert, 148 NW 20 "
The Supreme Court, in Arthur v. Morgan, 112 U.S. 495, 5 S.Ct. 241, 28 L.Ed. 825, held that carriages were properly classified as household effects, and we see no reason that automobiles should not be similarly disposed of."
Hillhouse v United States, 152 F. 163, 164 (2nd Cir. 1907). "...a citizen has the right to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon..." State vs. Johnson, 243 P. 1073; Cummins vs. Homes, 155 P. 171; Packard vs. Banton, 44 S.Ct. 256; Hadfield vs. Lundin, 98 Wash 516, Willis vs. Buck, 263 P. l 982;
Barney vs. Board of Railroad Commissioners, 17 P.2d 82 "The use of the highways for the purpose of travel and transportation is not a mere privilege, but a common and fundamental Right of which the public and the individual cannot be rightfully deprived."
Chicago Motor Coach vs. Chicago, 169 NE 22; Ligare vs. Chicago, 28 NE 934; Boon vs. Clark, 214 SSW 607; 25 Am.Jur. (1st) Highways Sect.163 "the right of the Citizen to travel upon the highway and to transport his property thereon in the ordinary course of life and business... is the usual and ordinary right of the Citizen, a right common to all." -
Ex Parte Dickey, (Dickey vs. Davis), 85 SE 781 "Every Citizen has an unalienable RIGHT to make use of the public highways of the state; every Citizen has full freedom to travel from place to place in the enjoyment of life and liberty." People v. Nothaus, 147 Colo. 210. "No State government entity has the power to allow or deny passage on the highways, byways, nor waterways... transporting his vehicles and personal property for either recreation or business, but by being subject only to local regulation i.e., safety, caution, traffic lights, speed limits, etc. Travel is not a privilege requiring licensing, vehicle registration, or forced insurances."
Chicago Coach Co. v. City of Chicago, 337 Ill. 200, 169 N.E. 22. "Traffic infractions are not a crime." People v. Battle "Persons faced with an unconstitutional licensing law which purports to require a license as a prerequisite to exercise of right... may ignore the law and engage with impunity in exercise of such right."
Shuttlesworth v. Birmingham 394 U.S. 147 (1969). U.S. Supreme Court says No License Necessary To Drive Automobile On Public Highways/Streets No License Is Necessary Copy and Share Freely YHVH.name 3 "The word 'operator' shall not include any person who solely transports his own property and who transports no persons or property for hire or compensation."
Statutes at Large California Chapter 412 p.83 "Highways are for the use of the traveling public, and all have the right to use them in a reasonable and proper manner; the use thereof is an inalienable right of every citizen." Escobedo v. State 35 C2d 870 in 8 Cal Jur 3d p.27 "RIGHT -- A legal RIGHT, a constitutional RIGHT means a RIGHT protected by the law, by the constitution, but government does not create the idea of RIGHT or original RIGHTS; it acknowledges them. . . " Bouvier's Law Dictionary, 1914, p. 2961. "Those who have the right to do something cannot be licensed for what they already have right to do as such license would be meaningless."
City of Chicago v Collins 51 NE 907, 910. "A license means leave to do a thing which the licensor could prevent." Blatz Brewing Co. v. Collins, 160 P.2d 37, 39; 69 Cal. A. 2d 639. "The object of a license is to confer a right or power, which does not exist without it."
Payne v. Massey (19__) 196 SW 2nd 493, 145 Tex 273. "The court makes it clear that a license relates to qualifications to engage in profession, business, trade or calling; thus, when merely traveling without compensation or profit, outside of business enterprise or adventure with the corporate state, no license is required of the natural individual traveling for personal business, pleasure and transportation."
Wingfield v. Fielder 2d Ca. 3d 213 (1972). "If [state] officials construe a vague statute unconstitutionally, the citizen may take them at their word, and act on the assumption that the statute is void." -
Shuttlesworth v. Birmingham 394 U.S. 147 (1969). "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." Donnolly 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 right to travel (called the right of free ingress to other states, and egress from them) is so fundamental that it appears in the Articles of Confederation, which governed our society before the Constitution."
(Paul v. Virginia). "[T]he right to travel freely from State to State ... is a right broadly assertable against private interference as well as governmental action. Like the right of association, it is a virtually unconditional personal right, guaranteed by the Constitution to us all." (U.S. Supreme Court,
Shapiro v. Thompson). EDGERTON, Chief Judge: "Iron curtains have no place in a free world. ...'Undoubtedly the right of locomotion, the right to remove from one place to another according to inclination, is an attribute of personal liberty, and the right, ordinarily, of free transit from or through the territory of any State is a right secured by the Constitution.'
Williams v. Fears, 179 U.S. 270, 274, 21 S.Ct. 128, 45 L.Ed. 186. "Our nation has thrived on the principle that, outside areas of plainly harmful conduct, every American is left to shape his own life as he thinks best, do what he pleases, go where he pleases." Id., at 197.
Kent vs. Dulles see Vestal, Freedom of Movement, 41 Iowa L.Rev. 6, 13—14. "The validity of restrictions on the freedom of movement of particular individuals, both substantively and procedurally, is precisely the sort of matter that is the peculiar domain of the courts." Comment, 61 Yale L.J. at page 187. "a person detained for an investigatory stop can be questioned but is "not obliged to answer, answers may not be compelled, and refusal to answer furnishes no basis for an arrest."Justice White, Hiibel "Automobiles have the right to use the highways of the State on an equal footing with other vehicles."
Cumberland Telephone. & Telegraph Co. v Yeiser 141 Kentucy 15. "Each citizen has the absolute right to choose for himself the mode of conveyance he desires, whether it be by wagon or carriage, by horse, motor or electric car, or by bicycle, or astride of a horse, subject to the sole condition that he will observe all those requirements that are known as the law of the road."
Swift v City of Topeka, 43 U.S. Supreme Court says No License Necessary To Drive Automobile On Public Highways/Streets No License Is Necessary Copy and Share Freely YHVH.name 4 Kansas 671, 674. The Supreme Court said in U.S. v Mersky (1960) 361 U.S. 431: An administrative regulation, of course, is not a "statute." A traveler on foot has the same right to use of the public highway as an automobile or any other vehicle.
Cecchi v. Lindsay, 75 Atl. 376, 377, 1 Boyce (Del.) 185. Automotive vehicles are lawful means of conveyance and have equal rights upon the streets with horses and carriages.
Chicago Coach Co. v. City of Chicago, 337 Ill. 200, 205; See also: Christy v. Elliot, 216 Ill. 31; Ward v. Meredith, 202 Ill. 66; Shinkle v. McCullough, 116 Ky. 960; Butler v. Cabe, 116 Ark. 26, 28-29. ...automobiles are lawful vehicles and have equal rights on the highways with horses and carriages. Daily v. Maxwell, 133 S.W. 351, 354.
Matson v. Dawson, 178 N.W. 2d 588, 591. A farmer has the same right to the use of the highways of the state, whether on foot or in a motor vehicle, as any other citizen.
Draffin v. Massey, 92 S.E.2d 38, 42. Persons may lawfully ride in automobiles, as they may lawfully ride on bicycles. Doherty v. Ayer, 83 N.E. 677, 197 Mass. 241, 246;
Molway v. City of Chicago, 88 N.E. 485, 486, 239 Ill. 486; Smiley v. East St. Louis Ry. Co., 100 N.E. 157, 158. "A soldier's personal automobile is part of his 'household goods[.]'
U.S. v Bomar, C.A.5(Tex.), 8 F.3d 226, 235" 19A Words and Phrases - Permanent Edition (West) pocket part 94. "t is a jury question whether ... an automobile ... is a motor vehicle[.]"
United States v Johnson, 718 F.2d 1317, 1324 (5th Cir. 1983). Other right to use an automobile cases: -
EDWARDS VS. CALIFORNIA, 314 U.S. 160 -
TWINING VS NEW JERSEY, 211 U.S. 78 - WILLIAMS VS. FEARS, 179 U.S. 270, AT 274 - CRANDALL VS. NEVADA, 6 WALL. 35, AT 43-44 - THE PASSENGER CASES, 7 HOWARD 287, AT 492 - U.S. VS. GUEST, 383 U.S. 745, AT 757-758 (1966) -
GRIFFIN VS. BRECKENRIDGE, 403 U.S. 88, AT 105-106 (1971) - CALIFANO VS. TORRES, 435 U.S. 1, AT 4, note 6 -
SHAPIRO VS. THOMPSON, 394 U.S. 618 (1969) - CALIFANO VS. AZNAVORIAN, 439 U.S. 170, AT 176 (1978) Look the above citations up in American Jurisprudence. Some citations may be paraphrased.
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/us-supreme-court-says-license-necessary-drive-public-letennier
So like the illegal taxing of income, and now the added illegal "tax" as a fine for not having Obama care and other illegal laws, we still have little choice but to obey them or go through years and money to fight it.
Our system of laws has become so double faced. Thousands of immigrants waiting as their papers are not processed for years while illegal ones get privileges. The whole system is a mess.
Yup... mostly because "We the People..." won't get off our asses and DO something about it. Come 2016 everyone will just pick Bush or Clinton again... then spend the next four years complaining about it...
Sad very sad...
I came to the USA on a job visa but that was taking 5 years... we applied for the lottery at the same time and the lottery came in first. Fortunately the company sponsoring me waited those 5 years. But a year after I moved to Salt Lake he sold the company Whew... cut that one close.
Income Tax The IRS is a PRIVATE company Was supposed to be a temp measure... uh huh..
Well I guess all in all its still not a bad country to live in :D Out here in Nevada its generally pretty peaceful... and you can go about your business. I rarely even see a cop these days. I haven't even seen a speed trap in our area for years now...
So SHHHH don't tell anyone We don't want a mad rush LOL
Looking at yahoos website articles... I get the impression that someone is trying to do something about it...Donald Trump ! Unless the articles are misleading..some seem to be suggesting he is gaining more credibility..I wonder just how its going to work out.
QuoteYup... mostly because "We the People..." won't get off our asses and DO something about it. Come 2016 everyone will just pick Bush or Clinton again... then spend the next four years complaining about it...
Sad very sad...
Was this after you had been in Canada "Z" from Germany ?. How long ago was that roughly ?
How long was you there before coming to Las Vegas and how long have you been in Vega now ?
Would you say things are now harder for Europeans to get entry to emigrate today ? Not sure what changes that they may have made..
QuoteI came to the USA on a job visa but that was taking 5 years... we applied for the lottery at the same time and the lottery came in first. Fortunately the company sponsoring me waited those 5 years. But a year after I moved to Salt Lake he sold the company Whew... cut that one close.
Has that been the case since you arrived ?
When I visited Vegas it seemed tame..but I have had people warn me to be careful in certain areas between Downtown and the strip.
QuoteWell I guess all in all its still not a bad country to live in :D Out here in Nevada its generally pretty peaceful... and you can go about your business. I rarely even see a cop these days. I haven't even seen a speed trap in our area for years now...
So SHHHH don't tell anyone We don't want a mad rush LOL
Quote from: astr0144 on July 11, 2015, 08:01:34 PM
Looking at yahoos website articles... I get the impression that someone is trying to do something about it...Donald Trump ! Unless the articles are misleading..some seem to be suggesting he is gaining more credibility..I wonder just how its going to work out.
Well I for one would love to see Trump win it... NOT because I like him ( I don't know him, never met him :P ) NOT because he is a "Nice Person" He may in fact be a jerk for all I know :P But because he is a successful businessman... and right now we need a new way of doing things... and THAT he could do
Its been long over due to get rid of political correct speaking... Illegal immigration has crippled California and the drug lords run the show... So what if he offended some people... I have Mexican friends who came here LEGALLY and fought just as hard as I did to do so... THEY say these Mexican flag waving illegals are giving them all a bad name...
So I think I will see if I can call his campaign office and lend a hand :D
QuoteWas this after you had been in Canada "Z" from Germany ?. How long ago was that roughly ?
How long was you there before coming to Las Vegas and how long have you been in Vega now ?
Do you work for the NSA? :P
I was 7 when we left German for Canada 1958... I went back to Germany in 1971 to study seamanship and got my papers to be officer on a merchant shipping line. Unfortunately the company froze hiring just after I got my sailing orders... I still have them :D
Moved to Salt Lake City In 1993, Vegas a little more than a year later.
I have no idea if it is harder to immigrate from Europe now or Canada for that matter I know they still run the annual lotteries same numbers... so depends how many apply I guess
It still is the same if you have a NEEDED job... also entertainers can come on a permanent visa for the duration of the show... something we were going to do with the Theme Park :D But I still need 10 Million for that one :P
QuoteHas that been the case since you arrived ?
When I visited Vegas it seemed tame..but I have had people warn me to be careful in certain areas between Downtown and the strip.
Pretty much yeah... sure every city has bad 'hoods' Martin Luther King and Bonanza area... North Las Vegas at Cheyenne and the Freeway... but generally its a very quiet town
We had one drive by shooting here in my area in all the years I was here. LOL just so happened it was when Seeker was just leaving A gang had moved into the rental house across the street... Next day there was a tank with a cannon pointed at the door... Its been peaceful ever since :D
I think Donald Trump maybe seen as a threat to the Political system (Certainly the Corrupt side of it or those involved) .
As Rich as D.T is...it may turn out to be the two main parties campaigning against him..But I suspect through whatever means that they would be able to obtain more money to campaign against him if need be...
Then yes if he is seen a threat to other criminal elements..Drug dealers, Mafia etc...Who knows what could happen. It certainly can be seen quite a risk being aware of it. But It seems History has always had such threats..Not sure if its seen as worse or more concerning today or not.. Maybe so with us now being much more aware of history and what goes on that maybe we would have been aware of before the Internet.
Then another issue maybe ..as good as he maybe with running things well in terms of Business and the economy...will D.T be suitable in dealing with many of the other World issues & requirements in being a President.
QuoteNOT because he is a "Nice Person" He may in fact be a jerk for all I know :P But because he is a successful businessman... and right now we need a new way of doing things... and THAT he could do
No....Sorry if it may seem that way ??? and I am asking personal questions..
But you had commented on some things in previous posts..but was not sure if you had explained your past.
I was just curious how you ended up in the USA when you came from Europe. I had no Idea you left Germany at the age of 7.
I thought that you had gone initially to Toronto Canada and later moved to the USA..
It seems you have certainly moved a few times.
Nor did I know you had been aiming to be a Merchent Seaman...
I am rather surprised that you have not ended up on a Coastal Area and live on a Boat :)
And maybe have more of a connection with Boats and Ships rather than Spaceships ;D as well as with the Medieval Knight warrior group connection.
So you have now been settled in Vegas over 20 years.
QuoteDo you work for the NSA? :P
Quote
I was 7 when we left German for Canada 1958... I went back to Germany in 1971 to study seamanship and got my papers to be officer on a merchant shipping line. Unfortunately the company froze hiring just after I got my sailing orders... I still have them :D
Moved to Salt Lake City In 1993, Vegas a little more than a year later.
I am rather surprised if overall Vegas is generally calm today after some of its past events..maybe with the latest technology CCTV etc.. it does prevent crimes more today..
But I thought that the Drug gangs may still be a concern.
Must have been quite a disturbing situation..if it was a rare incident..Cant Imagine what Seeker must have
been thinking at the time .. :)
I wonder if you took a Photo of the Tank :D
QuoteWe had one drive by shooting here in my area in all the years I was here. LOL just so happened it was when Seeker was just leaving A gang had moved into the rental house across the street... Next day there was a tank with a cannon pointed at the door... Its been peaceful ever since :D