Your Right to Drive
in [Drive]
|
From: k_flynn on 2 Mar 2007 14:44 proffsl wrote: > Pat O'Connell <gyp...(a)comcast.net> wrote: > > Larry wrote: > > > "proffsl" <prof...(a)my-deja.com> wrote: > > > > "Scott M. Kozel" <koze...(a)comcast.net> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Proffsl, last year your same arguments were beaten > > > > > to pieces in hundreds of posts that showed the fallacy > > > > > of your arguments. > > > > > > > > My arguments were heckled by certain posters, > > > > > > Yes, they were. They were also *resoundingly* defeated > > > on the merits. > > > > Proffy is a troll, > > Oh my! A personal insult. Something a Troll might resort to. No, a pertinent and truthful observation regarding a poster who re- posts losing arguments from a year ago that were not only disproven on their alleged merits, but which you had attempted to back up with LIES including your admitted FABRICATION when caught red handed!! > > and has been on my filter list for a long time. You > > know he's a troll, so why are you responding to > > him/her/it? > > Makes one wonder who the TROLLS really are. Not really. It is YOU, you pot-head LIAR.
From: Andrew Tompkins on 2 Mar 2007 17:38 proffsl wrote: > Our States are lying to us. Driving is not a privilege. Driving > is a Right. Our public streets were built on our property with our > money for the purpose of enhancing our Right of Liberty. But, the > more our public highways are made unusable by anything but the > automobile, the more this LIE that driving is a privilege makes us > all prisoners of privilege behind bars of blacktop. > Ah, I see you're back. > > A Rightful Republic may only derive it's Rightful Powers via the > Rightful Consent of the Citizens. If one does not have a Right to > do something, they can not give others, or government, their > Rightful Consent to do that thing. The individual has no authority > to prohibit, deny or obstruct others from doing things which do not > violate the Rights of others. Therefore, they can not give a > Rightful Republic their Rightful Consent to prohibit, deny or > obstruct others from doing things which do not violate the Rights > of others. > > When individuals form a collective, they bring into existence > certain behaviors that could not exist before, such as the behavior > of representing the collective. Therefore, only the collective has > the authority to give their Rightful Consent to such collective > behaviors, where no individual of that collective has such > authority. But, under no circumstances may the collective presume > to bestow upon themselves, or upon their representatives, the > privilege to prohibit, deny, obstruct, endanger or violate any > Rights of any innocent others. > > This is because Rightful Powers may only be derived by the Rightful > Consent of the Citizens. No Citizen has the authority to prohibit, > deny, obstruct, endanger or violate the Rights of any innocent > others, therefore they may not individually, or collectively, give > their Rightful Consent bestowing upon their representatives the > privilege to prohibit, deny, obstruct, endanger or violate the > Rights of any innocent others. It's just that simple. > > Nor shall the collective, or it's representatives, presume to > convert individual behaviors into collective behaviors, as this is > nothing more than a deceptive manner of attempting to convert > Rightful individual behaviors into collective privileges. Neither > the collective, nor it's representatives, may presume to convert a > Right into a privilege. > Sources? You have to support this publically. Otherwise, it's just you doing a lot of talking without saying a whole lot. Preferably quotes of the material that you intend to use as support as well as cites of the documents. > > Driving safely is not a collective behavior that only comes into > existence upon the forming of a collective. Driving safely is an > individual behavior. Therefore, the collective, or it's > representatives, may not presume to convert driving safely into a > collective behavior. > > Therefore, driving safely can only be one of two remaining types of > behaviors. Driving safely is either a Rightful behavior, or a > Wrongful behavior. Driving safely is a Wrongful behavior if it > prohibits, denies, obstructs, endangers or violates the Rights of > any others. Otherwise, it is a Rightful behavior. > > If driving safely is a Wrongful behavior, a behavior which > prohibits, denies, obstructs, endangers or violates the Rights of > others, then everybody should be prohibited from the behavior of > driving safely, and the collective may not presume to bestow upon > any individual, or representative, the privilege of driving safely. > > Otherwise, if driving safely is a Rightful behavior, a behavior > which DOES NOT prohibit, deny, obstruct, endanger or violate the > Rights of any others, then no innocent individual should be > prohibited from driving safely. And, no collective, or their > representatives, may presume to convert this individual behavior of > driving safely into a collective behavior, thereby presuming to > convert a Right into a privilege. > > Driving safely is an individual behavior, not a collective behavior. > Driving safely does not prohibit, deny, obstruct, endanger or > violate the Rights of any others. Therefore, Driving safely is a > Right. > Now you're changing your argument from the 'right to drive' to the 'right to drive safely'. That actually may have some merit conceptually. It has no merit in the real world until you can get all of the drivers in this country to drive safely all the time and not drive when they are ill, injured, distracted, drowsy, impaired, etc. > > Our States ARE lying to us. Driving IS NOT a privilege. Driving > IS a Right. > > Our public streets were built on our property with our money for the > purpose of enhancing our Right of Liberty, and we each have the > Right to use our public highways for personal travel in the > ordinary way. > > "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 > Already dealt with when you dropped by previously. Move on. > > But, the more our public highways are made unusable by anything but > the automobile, the more this LIE that driving is a privilege makes > us all prisoners of privilege behind bars of blacktop. > -- --Andy -------------------------------------------------- Andrew G. Tompkins Software Engineer Beaverton, OR http://home.comcast.net/~andytom/Highways --------------------------------------------------
From: k_flynn on 2 Mar 2007 18:11 Chas wrote: > <k_flynn(a)lycos.com> wrote > > Cite. For both points. > > 'Cite' what? Some stare decisis antagonistic to either government or the > Law? No, cite for your factual assertions contained in your post that you snipped out of your reply. Or were you just blowing off steam? > how droll. How irrelevant. "Of course the Law declares it a privilege" Where do you get that? That's one cite I was asking for. "as the purpose of government is to extend government, the purpose of the Law is to expand the purview of the Law." And where do you get that? That was the second cite I asked for. And now maybe you could explain how "stare decisis" is applicable to what you had to say.
From: Ashton Crusher on 3 Mar 2007 01:05 On Fri, 02 Mar 2007 03:33:43 GMT, Larry <x(a)y.com> wrote: >In article <1172806269.072397.151900(a)v33g2000cwv.googlegroups.com>, > "proffsl" <proffsl(a)my-deja.com> wrote: > >> Our States are lying to us. > >Not this again. The only liar around here is you, proffy. > >> Driving is not a privilege. > >Yes it is. > >> Driving is a >> Right. > >No it isn't. Proffs is correct. Driving is a right for private citizens. The courts have so ruled. It is not a right for commercial purposes. Just look at the Motor Vehicle licensing laws. The state has pretty much zero description in issuing a license. There are a couple almost meaningless hoops to jump thru that simply weed out the criminally incompetent, the rest get a license.
From: Ashton Crusher on 3 Mar 2007 01:06
On 1 Mar 2007 20:18:16 -0800, "k_flynn(a)lycos.com" <k_flynn(a)lycos.com> wrote: >On Mar 1, 8:33 pm, Larry <x...(a)y.com> wrote: >> In article <1172806269.072397.151...(a)v33g2000cwv.googlegroups.com>, >> >> "proffsl" <prof...(a)my-deja.com> wrote: >> > Our States are lying to us. >> >> Not this again. The only liar around here is you, proffy. >> >> > Driving is not a privilege. >> >> Yes it is. >> >> > Driving is a >> > Right. >> >> No it isn't. > >Larry, > >He's upset because I just pounded him into hard ground over another >lie in another thread, where he was claiming the US was not set up as >a democratic state. The US is a Republic, not a Democracy. I exposed his lies and he was so stoned, he >accused me of "changing" my "identity" so he didn't recognize me at >first, when I've never used another usenet identity at all. > >Shows you the danger of drug use. |