17 votes

Colorado Politicians Get “Invisible” License Plates That Make Them Immune To Traffic Laws


Posted by Kristin Tate

Politicians Given “Invisible” License Plates That Make Them Immune To Traffic Laws

"...Colorado lawmakers do not have to follow traffic laws, as they are exempt from speeding and parking tickets. The legislators are issued special license plates that are “invisible” to both traffic cams and traffic tickets. Their specially-issued plates do not show up in the DMV database.

As reported by CBS Denver, “The plates issued to the 100 state lawmakers and representatives elected to serve Colorado are preventing them not only from receiving photo radar tickets but also collection notices from past due parking tickets...

...In other words, even if an officer puts a parking ticket on a lawmaker’s car, there is no way to enforce that ticket since politician’s addresses are not present in the state DMV database..."

read more:

see also:

artist's rendering of magical plate for leaders of the future

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

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

I'm pretty sure they all say

ASSWIPE , on them. No wonder they're not registered

There was a story not too

There was a story not too long ago about how government vehicles in my area are basically exempt from getting tickets because the plates are not in the databases.

On a side note, why not just do what what the Mythbusters did and make a rotating plate. Then if you think there might be a problem somewhere, rotate the plate. Obviously there are caveats to this but I have to wonder about the look on the officer's face if he pulls you over because the plate didnt come up only to have it change when he starts walking back to his car to double check.

To climb the mountain, you must believe you can.

What I wrote on Ben's page, but something for everyone.

The Federal Government is not your government. The United States is two things: 1. a description of the states in union, and 2. a federal corporation more precisely understood as a corporate agent for the states regarding international matters. Interstate commerce, for example, is an international matter between the states.

If one comprehends that the American Republics in this union are independent sovereign states, that is, countries with individual nationalities that have entered into the Union for their mutual benefit, similar to the states of the European Union, then one can begin to see that ones true country and nationality is not the United States, but the republic in which s/he was born: one of the fifty states in the union. One could be a Texan, Iowan, or Connectican, for example. For people who were borne in one of the union states they have the choice of remaining under the direct corporate jurisdiction of the United States, or correcting the presumption of their nationality in law and returning to the nationality of the state in which they were born, and its de jure jurisdiction.

With this in mind, the United States is not, and never was, a country for two reasons: 1. it is merely an international corporate agent for the states, and 2. it never had a population until the 14th Amendment disenfranchised all state nationals and Article 4 States Citizens, by redefining their nationality through operation of law. Only US citizens who reside in a state can vote.

To further comprehend the importance of this, consider that one cannot serve two masters. The land was granted to the original states by European kings long before the United States came along. This, and all other land granted to states of the union after its formation (Article 4, Section 3), continues to be the sovereign jurisdiction of the states themselves, and is foreign to the United States as a matter of international law. If the states have sole jurisdiction over their land, where is the sole jurisdiction of the United States? It is within the District of Columbia and other possessions of the United States, such as Guam, Porto Rico, US Virgin Islands, & etc.. Therefore state nationals are actually, and jurisdictionally, non-resident aliens of the US.

Additionally, The Constitution only has force and meaning within the boundaries of the states of the union. DC is not a state, and I believe will never become one. The Constitution does not apply there. So if one is a US citizen, then one is a subject of this federal corporation which exists outside of the union.

All of this is a long winded way of saying that only US (14th Amendment) statutory citizens fall under the direct jurisdiction of the federal government. They are granted Civil Liberties and Civil Rights by it, and are bound to its statutory Roman Civil Law. That which a man can give, he can take away. State nationals on the other hand have Natural Rights granted to them by their Creator, which are protected for them by their state constitutions, and they operate within the jurisdiction of the Common Law of their respective state. This is where one can claim the right to travel.

For a more complete explanation of all this read The Red Amendment: http://www.pacalliance.us/reda...

~ Engage in the war of attrition: http://pacalliance.us/redamendment/

Boom, here's your proof.

Traffic laws are only applicable to Commercial Traffic.

When I am in my car, I'm a traveler, not acting as a commercial vehicle. When I got pulled over for a non-damaging reason, I inform the police officer that I'm a traveler freely moving on my roads and that I'm not involved in any commercial transport or activity. Since doing this, All I ever get is a warning. has happened 4 times now, 3 for speeding 15 over and 1 for not fully stopping at a stop sign.

Funny how lawyers and police know this and yet most still believe the lie of the traffic laws. They do not apply to a Traveler.


I've heard of this before, but if you don't mind me asking, how did you find this out? Also, seems to me like most police officers out there are just idiots that wouldn't have a clue what the difference between commercial traffic and just a traveler is....so seems like they'd just be like "what are you talking about?, here's your ticket".

Maybe I'm wrong, and I wanna look into it more, but you gotta admit a claim like that is kinda farfetched, especially to someone who doesn't know the liberty movement at all. Also, it would be awesome to see a video of being pulled over for speeding and telling the officer i'm not a commercial vehicle, just a traveler and see how it plays out.

Anyways, I don't mean any insult, it's not that I don't believe, it's just kinda hard to believe. But thanks for sharing the info for sure.

don't know why you would get a downvote

for these

Tweeting occasionally as himself @cudnoski on the twitter.

no way to enforce it?

that is a bullsh1t lie.

I use Blue Wave, but don't expect one of THEIR silly taglines.

I want one.

I want one.


So that as a libertarian you can be above the law?

Here you go.



Tweeting occasionally as himself @cudnoski on the twitter.