Traveling versus driving – no license needed (video proof)

It is worth researching if the driver’s license is only for people being paid to transport other people or goods.

The old and common definition for the word ‘driver’ was someone who drove a wealthy man/woman around all day. Like so many subtle deceptions, we have been taught that a man/woman operating a car is always a driver, whereas the truth may be that the man/woman is a traveler using a car.

Now it’s gets trickier because the car transforms into a ‘vehicle’ if it was possibly purchased with Federal Reserve Bank notes or if the car is being used by a ‘driver’. There’s more to learn. But the basic premise is that no entity, in the states united, can forbid someone from traveling in a car.

Here are details from someone named Jaro:

Driver’s license is for DRIVING, which is a COMMERCIAL activity. And the use of a car purchased with lawful money, which is NOT for profit, is NOT commercial activity, and thusly does NOT require any license.

The difference between a car bought with CREDIT from Federal Reserve (FRNs), and a car bought with REAL, lawful money (gold and silver coins), is that the car bought with FRNs is BY DEFAULT in commerce and so justly regulated by the State.
While a car bought with REAL, lawful money (gold and silver coins), is in no way in commerce, and is truly PRIVATE property protected by Public (common) Law, and so NOT subject to State regulation on public roads.

You just gotta use counter-claim in Equity in court to assert that, or otherwise avoid admitting that you’re the statutory person/defendant.

Here’s a video about traveling. Note the officer asks for things, but does not demand them. The officer is required to ask, but no one is obliged to provide.

Related posts:

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *