Can you drive without a license?

Can you drive without a license?

Most Americans waive their right to travel on the roads by getting a driver’s license.

Licenses are for commercial use of the roads. Government has a duty to regulate commerce. Government also has a duty to secure the blessings of liberty. There is no conflict between these two duties. Traveling without a license is a liberty that government officials are sworn to protect.

Commerce restricts travel. Examples:

Hadfield vs. Lundin, 98 Wash 516 “ … For while a Citizen has the Right to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, that Right does not extend to the use of the highways, either in whole or in part, as a place for private gain. For the latter purpose, no person has a vested right to use the highways of the state, but is a privilege or a license which the legislature may grant or withhold at its discretion.”

Washington State vs. City of Spokane, 186 P. 864:“The right of the citizen to travel upon the highway and to transport his property thereon, in the ordinary course of life and business, differs radically and obviously from that of one who makes the highway his place of business for private gain in the running of a stagecoach or omnibus.”

Willis v. Buck, 263 P. 982 (1928): “On that point the opinion is not controlling here, as no person has a vested right to use the public highways for a commercial purpose, and a denial of the mere license to do so takes from him no property or property right.”

Barney vs. Board of Railroad Commissioners, 17 P.2d 82 “ Heretofore the court has held, and we think correctly, that while a Citizen has the Right to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, that Right does not extend to the use of the highways, either in whole or in part, as a place of business for private gain.”

U.S. Supreme Court in Buck v Kuykendall 267 US 307 at page 314:“The right to travel interstate by auto vehicle upon the public highways may be a privilege or immunity of citizens of the United States. Compare Crandall v. Nevada, 6 Wall. 35” . . .
“A citizen may have, under the Fourteenth Amendment, the right to travel and transport his property upon them by auto vehicle. But he has no right to make the highways his place of business by using them as a common carrier for hire. Such use is a privilege which may be granted or withheld by the state in its discretion, without violating either the due process clause or the equal protection clause. Packard v. Banton, 264 U.S. 140, 144“

How do you like that? The U.S. Supreme Court says that a federal citizen may have the right to travel interstate by auto vehicle. Today’s judges tell you the opposite.

Don’t be fooled by the legal term “motor vehicle”. This is a term that originated in statutory definitions 100 years ago but in wide usage has become known to mean something else. Do not assume these old legislatures intended to use today’s common misuse of their language.

Ex Parte Hoffert, 148 NW 20:“ Thus self-driven vehicles are classified according to the use to which they are put rather than according to the means by which they are propelled”

The federal definition of Motor Vehicle: 18 USC Part 1 Chapter 2 Section 31 definitions:
“(6) Motor vehicle. – The term “motor vehicle” means every description of carriage or other contrivance propelled or drawn by mechanical power and used for commercial purposes on the highways…”
“(10) “Used for commercial purposes.” Means the carriage of persons or property for any fare, fee, rate, charge or other consideration, or directly or indirectly in connection with any business, or other undertaking intended for profit”

For more information read my essay on Driving here. But don’t blame me for corrupt courts that have no respect for your rights.

Steven Miller · Originally answered Jul 10, 2017

Leave a Reply

%d