Car and Driver licensing

[BADecker]

Is not your car your property? And are you not a free man/woman in a free country? I think Government should pay us to get licensed and to have our vehicle licensed.

What do you think?

No.  You are not a free man/woman in a free country.  You are subject to government laws in the country you live in.

Unless your country is a monarchy and you are a member of the royal family.

And the basic law is to not take freedom away from anyone else. Built right into the basics of the law are the methods for punishing government officials for attempting to take your freedom away for nothing.

[1714782512]

1714782512

[1714782512]

1714782512

[1714782512]

1714782512

[1714782512]

1714782512

[1714782512]

1714782512

[franky1]

nope

law is about taking freedom.. but to take it when bad people do bad things

in a lawless country, people are free. you have feet to walk, lips to talk. laws are made to restrict freedoms for those to impact others lives or property negatively

amendments are made to reduce the limitation or increase the limitation
but i find it foolish that now after 12 pages of waffle your saying laws are needed to give freedoms.

your just not grasping the concept of law at all

keep trying. you'll probably get it right in a few years

edit to respond to below post
dang badecker your still drilling the freeman mantra of man woman and person
DO YOUR FRIGGEN RESEARCH AWAY FROM THE FREEMAN CULT

remember amendments are changes to the law to give people rights. meaning the original law didnt include them
meaning the laws were initially made to limit people actions

also learn plain meaning.
plain meaning is not the complex crap you try to make out
plain meaning is in the law

[BADecker]

nope

law is about taking freedom.. but to take it when bad people do bad things

in a lawless country, people are free. you have feet to walk, lips to talk. laws are made to restrict freedoms for those to impact others lives or property negatively

amendments are made to reduce the limitation or increase the limitation
but i find it foolish that now after 12 pages of waffle your saying laws are needed to give freedoms.

your just not grasping the concept of law at all

keep trying. you'll probably get it right in a few years

But when is a thing bad? When is something that is done bad?

If you drive one mph over the speed limit, is this bad? Some States have official laws that say you can drive over the speed limit if you are not endangering anyone. So how do you determine what is bad? One way...

You do something bad when you harm a human being, or damage his property, or directly threaten him. That's it. And to show you, look through all the statutes and take a look at where the statute says "man" or "woman." Essentially all the statutes say "person," the definition of which doesn't include a man or woman.

It's right in the law. You don't have to go to some 400-page freeman brief to find it. If you want to call it freeman stuff, then you are calling the law freeman stuff. It can't be any plainer for you.

[djsugar]

Is not your car your property? And are you not a free man/woman in a free country? I think Government should pay us to get licensed and to have our vehicle licensed.

What do you think?

You cant really compare a real estate with a moving object. While you move your vehicle on the road , people around are subject to risk of being hit if you are not a qualified eligible driver. Driver license is not property paper of your car but it qualifies you as a driver.

[BADecker]

Is not your car your property? And are you not a free man/woman in a free country? I think Government should pay us to get licensed and to have our vehicle licensed.

What do you think?

You cant really compare a real estate with a moving object. While you move your vehicle on the road , people around are subject to risk of being hit if you are not a qualified eligible driver. Driver license is not property paper of your car but it qualifies you as a driver.

But licensing doesn't change the ability to drive carefully in anyone. In fact, because there are cops out on the roads, there are more accidents. Watch people when they see a cop. All of a sudden they become fearful, taking their eyes off the road, and watching to see if the cop is going to come after them.

If we treated licensing the way it should be, people would have enough confidence to not care if the cop ticked them or not. Why? Because 100% of the tickets can be beat where there is no accident. It's just that people don't know how. (I am talking USA and Britain, here)

Making the government pay you to get the license would help to clarify the power you have. It would take a whole lot of driving stress out of your life as well.

[franky1]

oh here we go again, clueless badecker

if no one had a licence and then a cop siren whirled behind them. more accidents would happen so more people would be afraid.
so driving licences do work as intended less people drive wrecklessly.

you. if you didnt have a driving licence would not be concentrating on driving if you seen a cop car. your brain would go to dream land trying to think of freeman waffles of how to introduce yourself to the police and how to try introducing your invoice pad to them.
where as normal common people would just drive.

your dreams would infact have more risk of causing a accident because your not trying to just drive carefully. your trying o be an ass to then try your freeman crap, which you wrongly think will work

its not your right to drive on a public road. thats what a licence is its a permit. a permission to be allowed on the public property.
if you think that a driving licence is just about passing a driving test. your wrong. otherwise people could just use their pass-test certificate as proof.
the licence is about other things which you are oblivious about

there are terms and conditions attached. where you can be banned from driving if you break those terms and conditions
even if you pass your test but then have a medical condition . you can have your licence revoked if that medical condition can cause issues.

a licence is not a warrant to do what you like until you cause an accident. its a licence that you agree to follow the rules to prevent the risk of even coming close to causing an accident.

if you want the freedom to drive like an ass.. do it on your own private land


as for governments paying people to get a driving licence.
guess what. governments get funds some how. so if people got paid.. they will get taxed later at a higher rate to recoup losses.
so theres no net benefit in getting paid.

it like you think that walt disney should pay its guests to visit its amusement parks and cinema's should pay its customers to watch movies.. i know you wish for a utopia where you can invoice your way into wealth. but the world does not work like that. your advice has many many flaws . as does your ability to not even be able to see them..so no one with intelliagence would dare pay you for your advice. and no one would pay you just to talk to you whether they are a friend, a stranger or a cop.

if you really want to find a way to make money that doesnt involve trying to scam people into paying you or being a pirate and just stealing things and abusing property thats not yours.. try to grow some ethics, morals and a conscious and actually do something that has a net benefit to the world

[senne]

Is not your car your property? And are you not a free man/woman in a free country? I think Government should pay us to get licensed and to have our vehicle licensed.

What do you think?

The main purpose of driving license is to make you eligible to use a vehicle, it is not paper of your car to prove your ownership. Car registration certificate is your car's ownership paper. When you have a high speed moving object in your hand and people around can be subject to accident if you dont know how to drive properly , just imagine how many fatality there can be. it is important to have better driving test and no loop holes so that whoever gets a license is indeed a responsible driver

[BADecker]

oh here we go again, clueless badecker

if no one had a licence and then a cop siren whirled behind them. more accidents would happen so more people would be afraid.
so driving licences do work as intended less people drive wrecklessly.

Says the clueless joker^^ who doesn't even realize that punctuation means something, and therefore, couldn't understand anything about the law or even what he is talking about at all.

[BADecker]

Is not your car your property? And are you not a free man/woman in a free country? I think Government should pay us to get licensed and to have our vehicle licensed.

What do you think?

The main purpose of driving license is to make you eligible to use a vehicle, it is not paper of your car to prove your ownership. Car registration certificate is your car's ownership paper. When you have a high speed moving object in your hand and people around can be subject to accident if you dont know how to drive properly , just imagine how many fatality there can be. it is important to have better driving test and no loop holes so that whoever gets a license is indeed a responsible driver

Wrong!

The drivers license exists to make money for the State, to identify drivers easily, and to trick people into thinking that they are a little plastic card.

The receipt you got when you bought the car is your basic ownership paper. All that the title does is to confirm the string of owners of the vehicle, so that it is more difficult to buy a stolen vehicle.

Considering all the car accidents and deaths among licensed people and vehicles, the license doesn't have anything to do with driving properly.

You as an experienced driver can test the abilities of a new driver. You probably drive better than the driving instructor, except if you ARE a driving instructor, of course.

[KingScorpio]

Is not your car your property? And are you not a free man/woman in a free country? I think Government should pay us to get licensed and to have our vehicle licensed.

What do you think?

the government builds and runs the roads, so you are with the license proving that you are sane enough to use it

[BADecker]

Is not your car your property? And are you not a free man/woman in a free country? I think Government should pay us to get licensed and to have our vehicle licensed.

What do you think?

the government builds and runs the roads, so you are with the license proving that you are sane enough to use it

The government is required to provide rights of way through the land. Get their stupid highways and roads off the rights of way so that I can travel without their dumb highways and roads in the way of my use of the rights of way.

Since the roads are public, they are mine as much as they are government's. License money is supposed to go to construction and maintaining them. But the accounting often isn't clear and plain. Meanwhile the rights of way are obstructed by their roads.

Licensing doesn't prove sanity. Sane people don't always remain sane. Even if you were sane when you got the license, in America there are no sanity tests given even then. And there isn't any testing at the time of license renewal, except for vision, maybe.

Licensing is all about money. Government and road construction companies make money off the licensing.

[franky1]

you dont have the right of way to travel anywhere.
you cant just walk onto someones property and say its your right..

you know the because you protest about you loving guns to stop militia from entering your property because you believe they dont have a right to enter your property

kinda funny how you dont want people on your property.. hilarious how you think you should have the right to go anywhere without being penalised(shot) but hypocritacally want to shoot anyone else that does similar

the government is not providing roads as a right. its a public service. and it has rules to use that service

right of way and freedom to travel have limitations. especially on property you dont own.
public highways are not your property. you need to realise that.

the driving licence is not just about showing the ability to press an accellerator pedal, brake pedal and turn the wheel its about understanding speed limits and dangers of people and other vehicles. it about knowing to stop at a stop sign/red light.

its about following the rules.
if you follow the rules then there is no reason to be stopped for any traffic violation so continue with your journey. but if your the kind(and obviously you are) that panics and gets emotional about traffic cops. then maybe thats your brain sending you an emotional response that maybe your doing something wrong to fear them..
.. maybe try listening to what your body is trying to tell you.
if you dont do anything that can even be considered as rule breaking. then you got nothing to fear.

if you think rules and laws dont apply to you. then guess what you are therefore invalidating your own written rights, as you dont believe you should follow the rules

its kind of funny how you want others to follow the rules when those people can risk overstepping your boundaries but you feel its ok to overstep others boundaries..

so which is it. are you an uncivilised cavemen with no rules, rights or responsibilities. or are you someone that actually cares about rules that have been made to protect the majority(including you)

if you keep pretending that you dont recognise rules. then guess what the rules that you wish to be used to protect you dont apply either

...
and yes governments use money to maintain the roads. just like gym membership use money to maintain a gym. just like anything in life.. nothing just appears using fairy dust.

if you dont want to contribute to society and enjoy the services society offers. become a hobbit and just live off your own land. become self sustainable and dont bother anyone. brickwall yourself in so that you cannot interfere with other and others cant interfere with you.

however if you want to be part of society, accept that responsibilities come with it. and just stop being a cry baby demanding crap you dont deserve

[Slow death]

I do not believe that anyone created such a thread. in my country people spend 2 months sitting in the classroom studying the road code, then people take the test and only if the person passes the written test will they pass the practical classes. How are the practical classes in my country?

The person has a driving school teacher or instructor where the person is enrolled and for two weeks the person will have practical classes, after the practical classes the person will take a practical test at my country's government institution responsible for land transport and if person pass the practice test the person will have a driving license. Ok, you will all ask me: With all these long processes there should be no accidents in my country, right? wrong!

Every day in my country many people die because of car accidents and guess the main reason for the many car accidents that we have in my country? Alcoholic beverages are the main cause of car accidents in my country.

The number of places selling alcohol is steadily increasing, and more breweries are being built in my country.

Basically, what's the point of having people go through a long process of take driving license, if my country's government doesn't do civic education so people don't drink while driving? Because the business of beer and other alcoholic beverages is very lucrative, the government closes its eyes. Of course it's the fault of people who drink and then drive cars, but my point here is:

Governments do whatever they want, they have created laws that they want and people just have to respect, driving license is required and there is no way to be against it.

[franky1]

Basically, what's the point of having people go through a long process of take driving license,

because. if they didnt go through a process of learning.. there would be far more accidents.

basically the guy above who i think i should now call baddumber thinks people should not have responsibility for there actions and just drive crazy and do whatever they like. including driving on others property

its guys like baddumber who would definetly cause a crash. infact its guy like baddumber who would get a licence and then purposefully cause an incident to test his crackpot theory that he can get away with it.

without thinking of the consequences he could be setting himself up for. or consequences to others affected by his actions.

[UltimatePro]

Did seems like trying to create outrage out of nothing. Like giving it meaning like free speech.

People should have licenses because you don't want nut jobs driving and causing accidents.

Freedom Speech Easy Rider
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gc11mJGre10

Is that from Brokeback Mountain?

Easy Rider, with Peter Fonda, Dennis Hopper, and Jack Nicholson.

I was just joking. Seeing a bunch of guys together out like in the woods.

[BADecker]

Basically, what's the point of having people go through a long process of take driving license,

because. if they didnt go through a process of learning.. there would be far more accidents.

You said "a process of learning," right? Kids watch the bus driver every day they go to school. It's a process of learning. They can drive buses safely, just like they can drive cars safely from watching their parents for years and years. It's a process of learning. The license teaches them nothing... except that the smarter ones understand that the State is stealing their money.

[franky1]

badumber
the driving licence is not a driving test..
there is more to a driving licence then just the test

dang you must be like 15 and never drove.
you seem to have no clue how things work do you

when you pass your test you get a certificate.
the certificate is the proof of ability to drive NOT THE LICENCE!!!

the licence is a separate thing. its a PERMIT a licence.. a permission proof..
its you applying for permission to drive on the road. the minimum requirements to be permitted to drive legally on the road is to be of a certain age, to be a citizen to have passed a driving test, to not have certain medical issues that can risk  potential incidents. and many other things. its a contract that then allows you to do something as long as you follow the rules linked to it

actually i think you must be 14.. becuse you dont even understand learners permit. which again is permission to use the road. but under stricter rules because you have not learned how to drive yet. things like needing a capable experienced driver with you. avoiding certain highways/motorways. not driving in certain weather conditions until you have passed certain tests

also learning to drive is not about being a backseat driver watching how your mom drives. its about doing theory test involving learning the rules of the road.

seriously just try to learn this stuff

also illegal immigrants entering america cannot get an american driving licence as they are not citizens. this means if they are caught not only will they be arrested for the driving offence but then when researching the person background. finding out they are not a citizen they then get deported too..

so all num-drum. chest thumping cavemen idea's that people should revoke their citizenships and not have driving licences .. will end up with people getting in more trouble.

atleast think about reality. not your utopian dream of outlaw pirate life.. which if you actually did get to have your outlaw pirate life.. you would be scared for your life and afraid to do anything.
yep you will

[franky1]

the rules are the rules. i get it you dont like them.
but first try to understand what the rules are and then learn why the rules are their

work out the benefit vs risk of the rules
here is one for you

money: try getting insurance as a non-licenced driver. i dont think you will get any. but if you did. the costs would be excessively higher than any saving you could make by not proving your roadworthy

here is another. if you got into an accident. without a licence the penalty is not just paying for the other parties bent bumper. but prison time and fines.

heres another one. just getting stopped by a cop can lead to alot of trouble

now if you still dislike the laws and think they should not apply to normal people. dont go to stupid websites run by the freeman cult o learn how to mis-interpret the rules. instead go to senators and learn how to change the rules

[BADecker]

The only thing to say is that franky1 is so wrong in almost everything he posts in this thread, that there is no reason to even answer what he says. The answer would include writing the whole system of laws and ethics into the forum. But he wouldn't even understand then.

Btw, "include" or "Includes" in legal definition means only what is written after the word "include/includes." The word "include" in the previous paragraph is not the legal form of the word. So, it really means "include, among other things."

[franky1]

badecker.
you are so wrong.
you have no clue what the plain meaning of things are.
law is the plain meaning

you keep trying to stir the pot by making complicated crap meanders. you cant even quote stuff right. other people have pointed out your failings. you have many tims quoted stuff that dont even refer to the things you make out they are about

its time you try to do some research away from your freeman cult. and actually research. you know read something. check it. understand it, check it again and then maybe decide if its worth quoting.
you seem to be a person that just grabs a unresearched opinion of something you wish was true and run with it like its the truth

did you even bother googling 'plain meaning law' to counter your own waffle misunderstanding

and includes is different than include. the final s means plural, meaning items mentioned after it are multiple, not a singular item

just go research the law if you really want to try giving advice.
or simply realise that you have yet more to learn. and then decide are you willing to try learning more. or give up