license to drive vs 'drivers license'

[Nikki]

It's important to remember that, after rampant Jew-bashing and whining about child protective services / paternal custody, drivers licenses are the bread and butter at Sooey.

They often boast of their major victories in that arena, not realizing that most municipalities can't be bothered with spending the time to deal with little sovereignoramus pissants. It's not until someone of the ilk of David Merrill violates every possible licensing, registration, and insurance law that the wheels finally start to turn.

In the mean while, the police have better things to do than to waste hours dealing with someone who travels (not operates or drives) a personal transportation device (not car or motor vehicle) with home-made license plates.

As an interesting aside, what would such a soverignoramus do if his personal transportation device were stolen? He couldn't report it to the police because it isn't registered and doesn't have valid license plates which could be entered into their records.

But, those small minds never think beyond their bulging eyebrows.

[Judge Roy Bean]

...Anyone ever realize that people from all over the world drive legally everyday in the USA, and everywhere else too? Do you think the police in California are worried about a database in Germany, which is actually an equivalent country in terms of civilization?

Yes, they are. The ultimate goal is to be able to identify anyone, anywhere anytime, in fact, in the minds of some that goal extends to being able to identify persons without them knowing they're being identified.

[Number Six]

License
A special permission to do something on, or with, somebody else’s property which, were it not for the license, could be legally prevented or give rise to legal action in tort or trespass.
Also spelled licence.

In the 1991 case of Edwards v O'Connor, the New Zealand court wrote:

"A license is simply an authority or permission to do what is otherwise wrongful or ilegal and in ordinary usage it extends to the document certifying or recording that the appropriate permission has been given by the competent authority."


Having known several people who expended great mental energy in fighting for their "right" to drive without driver's licenses, insurance, or even legal plates, in Vermont I would not recommend that it be tried especially in less rural states. There is usually a downward spiral from DWI or a police stop for a vehicle problem, followed by a condition where you are definitely on the radar screen, all the local cops are on the lookout for your beat up pick-up truck or van or econobox, with or without telltale political bumper stickers. Some purists even forego the chore of New Hampshire "live free or die" vehicle registration (insurance is optional for non-scofflaws).

A more effective gambit than having in state plates, is having plates tied to a friend's adress in say, Tennesee or Alabama. Have wife, kids and farm animals in the back of the van, so if stopped by the police, they get really nervous as they call back to headquarters and ask how to proceed. Most would rather be absolved of responsility in such a case, and let the vehicle go.

[wserra]

I cite experience that we all share.

Ah. The "everybody knows" authority.

I was pretty sure you didn't have any.

why should there be any court decisions on a noncontroversy?

Except that there are. Hundreds.

Appellant contends that he has been denied his constitutional rights to freedom of travel and due process of law by the state's licensing and insurance regulations. These issues have previously been addressed in our case law. The right to travel on public highways is not absolute. It is subject to reasonable regulation by the state, pursuant to the police power granted by the Constitution. We have previously held that the motor vehicle codes are a valid use of the police power.

State v. Wilson, No. 98-229 (Sup.Ct. Mont).

A state may rightfully prescribe uniform regulations necessary for public safety and order in respect to the operation upon its highways of all motor vehicles - those moving in interstate commerce as well as others. And, to this end, it may require the registration of such vehicles and the licensing of their drivers.

Hendrick v. Maryland, 235 U.S. 610 (1915).

No court has ever held that it is an impermissible infringement upon a citizen's constitutional Right to Travel for the legislature to decree that ... every person who operates a motor vehicle on public roads must have a valid operator's license.

City of Bismarck v. Stuart, 546 NW2d 366 (N.Dak. 1996).

And many, many others. Now, why don't you cite a single case which holds that a state cannot require a license?

[Farmer Giles]

Now, why don't you cite a single case which holds that a state cannot require a license?

because it would contradict the entire premise of the thread as repeatedly stated from the beginning. I know the game, it's interesting. It doesnt come to me naturally but I can see how they teach what in law school. If you confuse the jury enough you might win!

[wserra]

Now, why don't you cite a single case which holds that a state cannot require a license?

because it would contradict the entire premise of the thread

A premise such as the one implied by the title of a thread you started in the TP forum - "i dont have to pay cause i dont feel like it"? So the idea is that you don't have to do anything you don't "feel like"?

That was drug-induced mental haze in the 60s, and it's no better now.

[David Merrill]

A driver license is ruled by the Court for competency purposes only.

The card itself is a trust and the photo on it is of the trustee.

Using the driver license card for identification is wrong. Like the SSA cards say on the backside. Do not use for Identification Purposes.

What I suggest is that you sign the Driver License with your true name. Print it clearly enough that the police officer can read the spelling and inform him that you are not presenting the card for ID purposes, but only for competency to operate the car and to assure him that if you cause an accident, you will have the insurance coverage expressed on your proof of insurance card.

Memorize the Stopping Officer's name and inform him that you are doing so because if he writes you a ticket you will be demanding that he be the officer on the witness stand at the trial. Go over how you identified yourself with him so that he understands that you will be examining him about that on the witness stand.

He will let you go with a warning if you have not deeply offended the peace and dignity of the People.

If not, be sure that his signature is easily read on the ticket/summons. A second officer on the scene is likely to sign the ticket now that you have identified yourself correctly to the first Stopping Officer. It that goes correctly though, the prosecutor will likely shell-game out the Stopping Officer and the prosecutor in the black robe will allow it.

Then you prosecute for perjury.




Regards,

David Merrill.

[Judge Roy Bean]

Translation of the latest redundant word salad from Van Pelt (above):

When the left side of the rubbish tin writes the formula for pasta and meat sauce, have the bicycle wheel adjusted to compensate for the excess radiation. If that doesn't work, put eleven pounds of concrete stain on your saddle and place it in the back seat of the plane, securing it with super glue. Allow at least a week for the kale to sprout, then apply dry ice to the joint until the mail is delivered.

You're welcome.

[Farmer Giles]

I think a drivers license is an occupational permit. why would I need to have a license for something I dont practice?

the confusion is between the private law benefit of open roads and those who use them under some other concept.

international conventions are private law. By definition no one can expect something public like an official license when dealing with what comes from outside the system. It would be helpful to see that the police wear more than one hat. Traffic laws are "inland maritime", its analagous to what happens in the coasting waters. vehicles are like vessels, we "navigate rivers of tar". its about movement, flow, commerce. so rules are structured different than on purely land issues.the driver operates under a flag. that flag is what determines his status. there are 2 flags. the only way to get under the local flag is to sign up and be registered. If i dont have a local DL I cannot be a resident. the only residents in the vehicle code are title-holders.

[Prof]

Pfui. Word salad. The license allows you to drive; a license does not allow you to travel. You can walk without a license; you can board a airplane with a passport and a ticket.
The states have what are known as police powers, which encompass such things as crimes and other regulated activities. A medical license, a law license, a barber's license, and a driver's license are all necessary to do regulated activities. The state has chosen to regulate those who wish to drive on the public roads, just as it has chosen to regulate those who hold themselves out as beauticians. It has established several levels of licenses, including non-commercial licenses and commercial licenses. The state has determined that limiting access to the highways to only drivers/operators with tested skills, etc., just as access is limited to the skies is limited to persons with tested skills in airplane cockpits. Commerce is not the issue; police power/regulatory power is the nexus.

[David Merrill]

I think a drivers license is an occupational permit. why would I need to have a license for something I dont practice?

the confusion is between the private law benefit of open roads and those who use them under some other concept.

international conventions are private law. By definition no one can expect something public like an official license when dealing with what comes from outside the system. It would be helpful to see that the police wear more than one hat. Traffic laws are "inland maritime", its analagous to what happens in the coasting waters. vehicles are like vessels, we "navigate rivers of tar". its about movement, flow, commerce. so rules are structured different than on purely land issues.the driver operates under a flag. that flag is what determines his status. there are 2 flags. the only way to get under the local flag is to sign up and be registered. If i dont have a local DL I cannot be a resident. the only residents in the vehicle code are title-holders.

Indeed all revenue causes are to be adjudicated in admiralty. I can spell it out real slowly for Judge Roy Bean:



That is what a trust is. Nobody has a driver license. They become trustees of a card that is still private property of the state. The card is only kept with them, the driver, as long as they can be trusted with it. If they cannot be trusted they are no longer trustees.



Regards,

David Merrill.


P.S. The reason the police officer cannot remember whether or not he got a driver license or state ID card, or whether he gave it back or not, is that he was not there.

[Farmer Giles]

The states have what are known as police powers, which encompass such things as crimes and other regulated activities. A medical license, a law license, a barber's license, and a driver's license are all necessary to do regulated activities.

see, these are all occupational licenses! im not a driver! im not a doctor, barber or lawyer.

The state has chosen to regulate those who wish to drive on the public roads, just as it has chosen to regulate those who hold themselves out as beauticians.

yes!

The state has determined that limiting access to the highways to only drivers/operators with tested skills, etc., just as access is limited to the skies is limited to persons with tested skills in airplane cockpits. Commerce is not the issue; police power/regulatory power is the nexus.[/

and there it is: drivers OR other operators. In the vehicle code, an "operator" is a driver OR person in 'physical control'. If "tested skills" is the standard we're innocent until proven otherwise. Presumably Im competent, I have the right to prove Im competent, just like I get to prove Im clean. The charge of "operating w/o a license" is only applicable to someone who is unqualified, or someone operating a commercial vehicle without a CDL.

[Farmer Giles]

P.S. The reason the police officer cannot remember whether or not he got a driver license or state ID card, or whether he gave it back or not, is that he was not there.

not surprised.

[Prof]

The states have what are known as police powers, which encompass such things as crimes and other regulated activities. A medical license, a law license, a barber's license, and a driver's license are all necessary to do regulated activities.

see, these are all occupational licenses! im not a driver! im not a doctor, barber or lawyer.

The state has chosen to regulate those who wish to drive on the public roads, just as it has chosen to regulate those who hold themselves out as beauticians.

yes!

The state has determined that limiting access to the highways to only drivers/operators with tested skills, etc., just as access is limited to the skies is limited to persons with tested skills in airplane cockpits. Commerce is not the issue; police power/regulatory power is the nexus.[/

and there it is: drivers OR other operators. In the vehicle code, an "operator" is a driver OR person in 'physical control'. If "tested skills" is the standard we're innocent until proven otherwise. Presumably Im competent, I have the right to prove Im competent, just like I get to prove Im clean. The charge of "operating w/o a license" is only applicable to someone who is unqualified, or someone operating a commercial vehicle without a CDL.

Pfui. The police power can be used to prohibit. The charge you refer to is simple -- no license, you are guilty. You may not like it but there it is. This is not criminal, at least initially, it is regulatory. Regulation means that you cannot do something without the permission (license) of the state. Let me compare this to something you might understand. When you were in primary school, and needed to use the restroom, you had to ask permission. You could not just get up and leave. The teacher really did not care whether you needed to use the restroom, unless you were some sort of troublemaker. The teacher did, however, require you to ask permission. Do not confuse the presumption of innocense with a presumption of competence -- otherwise, you could, without state interference, try to perform brain surgery.

[Nikki]

Farmer

You have some interesting interpretations and opinions.

Unfortunately, they don't matter at all.

The ones that matter are those which were enacted into law and the court decisions which have interpreted them.

If you were to bother to take the time to follow any of the case links which others here have provided, you will find, without any doubt whatsoever, that everyone who has tried to argue interpretations and opinions similar to yours has lost with a resounding thud.

By the way, David is totally unqualified to give any advice regarding motor vehicle or license laws. The only motor vehicle he has left is his cute little electric bicycle since he lost everything else during his unsuccessful battles over registration, licenses, tickets, and so on.

[Farmer Giles]

The charge you refer to is simple -- no license, you are guilty.

no occupational drivers license, or no valid license at all? thats where the position becomes contradictory. the vehicle code requires only a valid license, not a drivers license. if you want to know what a valid license is, see how people are operating automobiles without any DL at all every day simply because they arent U.S. or Canada residents. Nobody from Germany has a drivers license in California but they legally operate motor vehicles there all the time. Nobody has a valid permit to do anything except under the jurisdiction of that local state. Germany cannot authorize me to drive in California. Effectively, foreign drivers do not have an actual drivers license when they go abroad. they do have a nonresident exception, and their home DL doubles as a valid photo ID. If their home country doesnt issue a valid DL format, there's the IDP, which was designed "especially in the case of" these drivers, by the language of that 1949 convention (art 24 sec 2).

a license is the privilege to operate a motor vehicle. its not a "thing". the card or format is not the license. the license is abstract, its status. nobody's checking a drivers status by wondering about foreign administrations, motorists are checked againt the same domestic database. the problem is getting to the end of an entirely correct procedure, turning around, and completely ignoring what you just saw, because you're confused.

Do not confuse the presumption of innocense with a presumption of competence -- otherwise, you could, without state interference, try to perform brain surgery

it has nothing to do with occupational restrictions. the nonresident exception exists under every flag in the world, because 'it isnt brain surgery', not at all. its just private motoring. i never heard of a foreign occupational license being valid for medical or other highly qualified activites.

[David Merrill]

and there it is: drivers OR other operators. In the vehicle code, an "operator" is a driver OR person in 'physical control'. If "tested skills" is the standard we're innocent until proven otherwise. Presumably Im competent, I have the right to prove Im competent, just like I get to prove Im clean. The charge of "operating w/o a license" is only applicable to someone who is unqualified, or someone operating a commercial vehicle without a CDL.

Indeed like a cause back in 2000; May 14 in fact the US was up for arrest and had to pay bond of $11B out the CAFR (2x the national debt at that time). The basis was simply that this fellow had built three homes just prior to his little house off the grid. So he knew how to build safe homes, as proven by the inspections all passing prior. It was monopoly and RICO to stipulate that he had to go the the Regional Code for inspections.

I decided to sanitize the actual filings. After ten years, the guy lives so peacefully we don't need Dezcad PACERing the fellow so you can Quatloser him...

[Joe Dirt]

and there it is: drivers OR other operators. In the vehicle code, an "operator" is a driver OR person in 'physical control'. If "tested skills" is the standard we're innocent until proven otherwise. Presumably Im competent, I have the right to prove Im competent, just like I get to prove Im clean. The charge of "operating w/o a license" is only applicable to someone who is unqualified, or someone operating a commercial vehicle without a CDL.

When you go to your friendly neighborhood DMV office they too presume that you are competent. You prove your competence doing a few things; passing a vision test, passing a written examination of traffic laws and passing a road test... then, CONGRATULATIONS, you become a licensed driver!!! Otherwise, Go Greyhound.... leave the driving to us.

Indeed like a cause back in 2000; May 14 in fact the US was up for arrest and had to pay bond of $11B out the CAFR (2x the national debt at that time). The basis was simply that this fellow had built three homes just prior to his little house off the grid. So he knew how to build safe homes, as proven by the inspections all passing prior. It was monopoly and RICO to stipulate that he had to go the the Regional Code for inspections.

I decided to sanitize the actual filings. After ten years, the guy lives so peacefully we don't need Dezcad PACERing the fellow so you can Quatloser him...

So, David, how did you manage to get the US to be "up for arrest" and bond it for $11B?

[Farmer Giles]

When you go to your friendly neighborhood DMV office they too presume that you are competent. You prove your competence doing a few things; passing a vision test, passing a written examination of traffic laws and passing a road test... then, CONGRATULATIONS, you become a licensed driver!!! Otherwise, Go Greyhound.... leave the driving to us.

CHAPTER V. DRIVERS OF MOTOR VEHICLES IN INTERNATIONAL TRAFFIC
Article 24

1. Each Contracting State shall allow any driver admitted to its territory who fulfils the conditions which are set out in Annex 8 and who holds a valid driving permit issued to him, after he has given proof of his competence, by the competent authority of another Contracting State or subdivision thereof, or by an Association duly empowered by such authority, to drive on its roads without further examination motor vehicles of the category or categories defined in Annexes 9 and 10 for which the permit has been issued.

2. A Contracting State may however require that any driver admitted to its territory shall carry an international driving permit conforming to the model contained in Annex 10, especially in the case of a driver coming from a country where a domestic driving permit is not required or where the domestic permit issued to him does not conform to the model contained in Annex 9.

3. The international driving permit shall, after the driver has given proof of his competence, be delivered by the competent authority of a Contracting State or subdivision thereof, or by a duly authorised Association, and sealed or stamped by such authority or Association. The holder shall be entitled to drive in all Contracting States without further examination motor vehicles coming within the categories for which the permit has been issued.

4. The right to use the domestic as well as the international driving permit may be refused if it is evident that the conditions of issue are no longer fulfilled.

5. A Contracting State or a subdivision thereof may withdraw from the driver the right to use either of the abovementioned permits only if the driver has committed a driving offence of such a nature as would entail the forfeiture of his driving permit under the legislation and regulations of that Contracting State. In such an event, the Contracting State or subdivision thereof withdrawing the use of the permit may withdraw and retain the permit until the period of the withdrawal of use expires or until the holder leaves the territory of that Contracting State, whichever is the earlier, and may record such withdrawal of use on the permit and communicate the name and address of the driver to the authority which issued the permit.

http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d06/vc12503.htm

Unlicensed Nonresident
12503. A nonresident over the age of 18 years whose home state or country does not require the licensing of drivers may operate a foreign vehicle owned by him for not to exceed 30 days without obtaining a license under this code.

Amended Ch. 1748, Stats. 1971. Operative March 4, 1972.

[Doktor Avalanche]