turtlespeed 212 #101 August 17, 2010 Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote Nataly What state do you live in? LMAO.... He stuffed his mouth there pretty good huh? Turtle.... Nataly lives in ENGLAND... Billy, I think turtel was being a smart ass about what state she lives in. I know he normally isnt a smart ass in the forums so I can see why you might have been confused... My point is that she didn't seem to be very informed before she jumped to her conclusions.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
d_squared431 0 #102 August 17, 2010 Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote Nataly What state do you live in? LMAO.... He stuffed his mouth there pretty good huh? Turtle.... Nataly lives in ENGLAND... Billy, I think turtel was being a smart ass about what state she lives in. I know he normally isnt a smart ass in the forums so I can see why you might have been confused... My point is that she didn't seem to be very informed before she jumped to her conclusions. You mean i miss understood the point you were making...?TPM Sister#130ONTIG#1 I love vodka.I love vodka cause it rhymes with Tuaca~LisaH You having a clean thought is like billyvance having a clean post.iluvtofly Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 212 #103 August 17, 2010 Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote Nataly What state do you live in? LMAO.... He stuffed his mouth there pretty good huh? Turtle.... Nataly lives in ENGLAND... Billy, I think turtel was being a smart ass about what state she lives in. I know he normally isnt a smart ass in the forums so I can see why you might have been confused... My point is that she didn't seem to be very informed before she jumped to her conclusions. You mean i miss understood the point you were making...? No . . . You never do that. If she lived in the states or HAD ever lived in the states, her answers may be just a little better informed.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JSBIRD 1 #104 August 17, 2010 Quote It's not a right, but in some places in the US, .... clip.... It certainly is a right...unless you've given up that right somehow. Yes, there is indeed a Right to Drive "safely". However, if you learn what the legal definition of 'driver' and 'motor vehicle' are, you can see that licensing is not required for most travelers. "The streets belong to the public and are primarily for the use of the public in the ordinary way." — Packard v. Banton, 264 U.S. 140 (1924) – http://laws.findlaw.com/us/264/140.html#144 What is the "ordinary way" we use our public highways for personal travel today? Driving the automobile, of course. A hundred years ago, the "ordinary way" would have been the horse and buggy, and nobody would have even attempted to deny that Right. Yet, today, through deceptive court rulings, our Right of Locomotion ordinarily used for personal travel on our public highways is routinely being violated by every state. And, in further support of our Right to Drive the ordinary Locomotion of the day on our public highways, there is the following court ruling. Note it’s use of the word "ordinarily", meaning the Right of Locomotion ordinarily used: "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 14th Amendment and by other provisions of the Constitution." – Williams v. Fears, 179 U.S. 270 (1900) – http://laws.findlaw.com/us/179/270.html#274 And then, in very explicit terms, our Right to Drive Automobiles is recognized by this court: "The right of a citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, by horse-drawn 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." Slusher v. Safety Coach Transit Co., 229 Ky 731, 17 SW2d 1012, and affirmed by the Supreme Court in Thompson v. Smith 154 S.E. 579. Driver Licensing is based on the presumption that we somehow owe it to society to demonstrate that we are unlikely harm any others in the process of Driving. But, the following court ruling clearly states that we inherently OWE NOTHING. "[The Individual] owes nothing to the public so long as he does not trespass upon their rights." — Hale vs. Hinkel, 201 US 43, 74-75 – http://laws.findlaw.com/us/201/43.html#74 Furthermore, Driver Licensing serves no purpose to highway safety that laws against endangerment didn’t already serve. Read more on this issue at: http://proffsl.110mb.com/driver_licensing.php References : Packard v. Banton, 264 U.S. 140 (1924) – http://laws.findlaw.com/us/264/140.html#144 Williams v. Fears, 179 U.S. 270 (1900) – http://laws.findlaw.com/us/179/270.html#274 359"Now I've settled down, in a quiet little town, and forgot about everything" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tetra316 0 #105 August 18, 2010 While I am not a lawyer, I'm am sure you will find these have all been superceded by more recent case law. Laws change with the times. The right to travel is different than the right to drive an automobile, which is not a right but a privilege. Hence, all the laws surrounding who can drive and at what age. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
