3 votes

Arguments that can be used to nullify Drivers License contracts

When I obtained my State issued Drivers License, I unknowingly entered into an agreement with the State which caused me to give up my right to travel unmolested on the roads. When deception is used during the creation of a contract, the contract becomes fraudulent and fraudulent contracts are null and void. Furthermore, causing someone to unknowingly give up a constitutionally protected right does not remove that right from an American. No person or government is qualified to give a right as a gift, or take a right away as if it were a privilege.

If an American is forced, coerced, or unknowingly placed under the state’s powers, the courts have ruled it is a clear violation of their rights. The majority of Americans carrying State issued Drivers Licenses and vehicle registrations have no knowledge of the rights they waived in obeying laws such as these that the U.S. Constitution clearly states are unlawful, i.e. laws of no effect – laws that are not laws at all. An area of serious consideration for every police officer is to understand that the most important law in our land which each officer has taken an oath to protect, defend, and enforce, is not State laws and city or county ordinances, but the law that supersedes all other laws—the U.S. Constitution. If laws in a particular State or local community conflict with the supreme law of our nation, there is no question that the officer’s duty is to uphold the U.S. Constitution. Furthermore, when a Drivers License is required to perform routine daily functions like cashing checks, selling personal property at pawn shops, and to even pick up prescription medicine, a Drivers License contract becomes a “Contract of Adhesion” in which Americans are put in a situation where they have no choice but to accept the terms of the contract and obtain a Drivers License.

Other legal Arguments that nullify arbitrary contracts between the people and the State:

http://go213mph.wordpress.com/



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

And here:

In the: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

By the: Common Law Vehicular Judicial Notice
For the: Constitutional Driver's License

http://www.nationalrepublicregistry.com/public/2012/PA/08.03...

How about this...

COMMON LAW VEHICULAR JUDICIAL NOTICE

CONSTITUTIONAL DRIVER LICENSE COLORADO

County of_Mesa

OFFICE OF THE CLERIC_Recorder , Colorado

CONSTITUTIONAL DRIVER LICENSETHE UNDERSIGNED Common Law
Citizen_ per se: hereby Certifies, by Rights
Secured under provisions of the Constitution of the United States of
America, the Constitution of the several states, Common Law, Nature
and Laws of Natures GOD, that these Rights are retained in FEE
SIMPLE ABSOLUTE, and held and protected with special regard to
Rights designated and/or set forth as follows: ALSO NOTE Rights and
Property are ONE AND THE SAME THING-by the Honorable Justice LOUIS
BRANDIS U.S. SUPREME COURT.NOTICE AND ADVISORY OF RIGHTS CLAIMED
INVIOLATE: 1) The Right to TRAVEL FREELY, UNENCUMBEred, and UNFETTEred is
guaranteed as a RIGHT and not a mere privilege. That the Right to
TRAVEL is such a BASIC RIGHT it does NOT even need to be mentioned
for it is SELF-evident by Common Sense that the Right to TRAVEL is a
BASIC CONCOMMITANT of a FREE Society to come and go from length and
breath FREELY UNENCUMBEred and UNFETTEred distinguishes the
characteristic required for a FREE PEOPLE TO EXIST IN FACT. Please
See SHAPIRO vs. THOMSON, 394 U.S. 618 . Further, the Right to TRAVEL
by private conveyance for private purposes upon the Common way can
NOT BE INFRINGED. No license or permission is required for TRAVEL
when such TRAVEL IS NOT for the purpose of [COMMERCIAL] PROFIT OR
GAIN on the open highways operating under license IN COMMERCE. The
above named Common Law Citizen listed IS NOT OPERATING IN COMMERCE
and as such is thereby EXEMPTED FROM THE REQUIREMENT OF A LICENSE AS
SUCH. Further, Coloraco state, is FORBIDDEN BY LAW from
converting a BASIC RIGHT into a PRIVILEGE and requiring a LICENSE
and or a FEE CHARGED for the exercise of the BASIC RIGHT. Please SEE
MURDOCK vs. PENNSYLVANIA, 319 U.S. 105, and if Colorado,
state does ERRONIOUSLY convert BASIC RIGHTS into PRIVILEGES and
require a License or FEE a Citizen may IGNORE THE LICENSE OR FEE
WITH TOTAL IMMUNITY FOR SUCH EXERCISE OF A BASIC RIGHT. Please see
Schuttlesworth vs. BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA, 373 U.S. 262. Now if a
Citizen exercises a BASIC RIGHT and a Law of ANY state is to the
contrary of such exercise of that BASIC RIGHT, the said supposed Law
of ANY state is a FICTION OF LAW and 100% TOTALLY UNCONSTITUTIONAL
and NO COURTS ARE BOUND TO UPHOLD IT AND NO Citizen is REQUIred TO
OBEY SUCH UNCONSTITUTIONAL LAW OR LICENSE REQUIREMENT. Please see
MARBURY vs. MADISON, 5 U.S. 137 (1803), which has never been
overturned in over 194 years, see Shephard's Citations. Now further,
if a Citizen relies in good faith on the advice of Counsel and or on
the Decisions of the UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT that Citizen has a
PERFECT DEFENSE to the element of WILLFULNESS and since the burden
of proof of said WILLFULNESS is on the Prosecution to prove beyond a
REASONABLE DOUBT, said tas or burden being totally impossible to
specifically preform there is NO CAUSE OF ACTION FOR WHICH RELIEF
MAY BE GRANTED BY A COURT OF LAW. Please see U.S. vs. Bishop 412
U.S. 346. OBVIOUSLY THERE IS NO LAWFUL CHARGE AGAINST EXERCISING A
BASIC Right to TRAVEL for a regular Common Law Citizen NOT IN
COMMERCE on the common way Public HlGHWAY. THAT IS THE LAW!!! The
above named Citizen IS IMMUNE FROM ANY CHARGE TO THE CONTRARY AND
ANY PARTY MAKING SUCH CHARGE SHOULD BE DULY WARNED OF THE TORT OF
TRESPASS!!! YOU ARE TRESPASSING ON THIS Common Law Citizen!!!
2) The original and Judicial jurisdiction of the United States
SupremeCourt is ALL actions in which a State may be party, thru
subdivision, political or trust. This includes ALL state approved
subdivisions and/or INCORPORATED Cities, Townships, Municipalities,
and Villages, Et Al . Please see Article 3, Section 2, Para. (1) and
(2), U.S. Constitution.
3) The undersigned has NEVER willingly and
nowingly entered into ANY Contract or Contractual agreement giving
up ANY Constitutional Rights which are secured by the CONSTITUTION,
the SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND. This Common Law Citizen has NOT harmed
any party, has NOT threatened any party, and that includes has NOT
threatened or caused any endangerment to the safety or well being of
any party and would leave any claimant otherwise to their strictest
proofs otherwise IN A COURT OF LAW. The above named Citizen is
merely exercising the BASIC RIGHT TO TRAVEL UNENCUMBEred and
UNFETTEred on the Common public way or highway, which is their RIGHT
TO SO DO!!! Please see Zobel vs. Williams, 457 U.S. 55, held the
RIGHT TO TRAVEL is Constitutionally PROTECTED!!
4) Conversion of the RIGHT TO TRAVEL into a PRIVILEGE and or
CRIMEIs Fraud and clear and direct conflict with she UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION,
SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND. LAWS made by any state, which are clearly
in direct CONFLICT or REPUGNANCY are UNCONSTITUTIONAL and are NOT
WITH STANDING IN LAW AND ARE BEING CHALLENGED AS SUCH HERE AND
THEREBY ARE NULL AND VOID OF LAW ON THEIR FACE. NO COURTS ARE BOUND
TO UPHOLD SUCH FICTIONS OF LAW AND NO Citizen is bound to obey such
a FICTION OF LAW. SUCH REGULATION OR LAW OPERATES AS A MERE NULLITY
OR FICTION OF LAW AS IF IT NEVER EXISTED IN LAW. No CITIZEN IS BOUND
TO OBEY SUCH UNCONSTITUTIONAL LAW!
5) The payment for a privilegerequires a benifit to be received As the RIGHT TO
TRAVEL is already secured it is clearly unlawful to cite any charges without direct
damage to the specific party . Nor may a Citizen be charged with an
offense for the exercise of a CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT, in this case the
RIGHT TO TRAVEL. Please see Miller vs. UNITED STATES 230 F2d 486 .
Nor may a Citizen be denied DUE PROCESS OF LAW or EQUAL PROTECTION
UNDER THE LAW.
6) The undersigned does hereby claim, declare, and
certify ANY AND ALL their CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS INVIOLATE from GOD
and secured in THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION and the CONSTITUTION
OF THE state wherein they abode as a SOVEREIGN, COMMON LAW CITIZEN
existing and acting entirely AT THE COMMON LAW, and retains ALL
BASIC RIGHTS under the CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
NATURE AND NATURE'S GOD AND UNDER THE LAWS OF GOD THE SUPREME LAW
GIVER.
7) ANY VIOLATOR OF THE ABOVE CONSTRUCTIVE NOTICE AND CLAIM IS
CRIMINALLY TRESPASSING UPON THIS ABOVE NAMED COMMON LAW Citizen and
WILL BE PROSECUTED TO THE FULLEST EXTENT UNDER THE SUPREME LAW OF
THE LAND. BE WARNED OF THE TRESPASS AND THE ATTACHED CAVEATS. ALSO
TAKE CONSTRUCTIVE NOTICE, IGNORANCE OF THE LAW IS NOT AN EXCUSE!!

SIGNATURE OF THE ABOVE NOTED Common Law Citizen is
signed________________________________
Ami Lyn: Thompson W/O PREJUDICE 1-308 UCC
SIGNATURES ON RECORD RECEPTION # 2623085BK/PG 5347/378 AUG. 8 2012
County Clerk state of MESA COUNTYGRAND JUNCTION, COLORADO

http://www.scribd.com/doc/105591714/Constitutional-drivers-l...

"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they attack you, then you win!"
GANDHI

"The belief is worthless if the fear of social and physical punishment overrides the belief."