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.

[Also see Good summary about traveling versus driving for state citizens.]

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.

Notes for 2nd Video:

“Pulled over for the third time in 8+ months and still traveling freely and this time VERIFIED the right to travel as i am WELL WITHIN THEM(my rights) to do what i’m doing. This video takes place after i have already handed him my paperwork and he has handed it back stating, “Hold tight for a minute,” and has returned to his patrol car already. As you can clearly see this isn’t some setup, i just had barely picked up my wife off of work and in fact, this officer followed me across Main Street while on Vine Street and didn’t pull me over when i pulled to the side to pick up my wife, he went on and turned down 100 West going North. We decided to go get gas first off so we turned down 100 West to goto Chevron that was down on 500 North. Low and behold he was sitting off to the side flipped around already waiting for me to continue down Vine Street, instead he flipped around behind us as soon as we passed him. No traffic violations ever happened at any point and he finally initiated the stop at the end of the street, actually in front of one my friends places. But he got what information he needed and honored his oath letting me continue to travel. He did use his emergency lights on me, but I don’t expect all cops/people/anyone to understand this as it is not the norm and we are not taught that we have an option. Travel safely my friends.” – Brian Schaff

Here is related knowledge from FamGuardian.org:

“A state Citizen has the right to travel on the public easements (public roads) without being registered. A statutory “U.S. citizen” does not. It is a privilege for a foreigner to travel in any of the several states.  If you are a statutory U.S. citizen, you are a foreigner in a constitutional state. The state legislators can require foreigners and people involved in commerce (chauffeurs, freight haulers) to be licensed, insured, and to have their vehicles registered. When you register your car, you turn over power of attorney to the state. At that point, it becomes a motor vehicle. If it is not registered then it is not a motor vehicle and there are no motor vehicle statutes to break. There are common law rules of the road. If you don’t cause an injury to anybody then you cannot be tried.

If your car is registered, the state effectively owns your car.  The state supplies a sticker to put on your license plate every time you re-register the motor vehicle. Look closely at the sticker on your plate right now. You may be surprised to see that it says “OFFICIAL USE ONLY”.(Note: In some states, they do not use stickers on the plate) You may have seen municipal vehicles that have signs on them saying “OFFICIAL USE ONLY” on them but why does yours? You do not own your car. You may have a Certificate of Title but you probably do not have the certificate of origin. You are leasing the state’s vehicle by paying the yearly registration fee. Because you are using their equipment, they can make rules up on how it can be used. If you break a rule, such as driving without a seatbelt, you have broken the contract and an administrative procedure will make you pay the penalty. A state Citizen must be able to explain to the police officers why they are not required to have the usual paperwork that most people have. They should carry copies of affidavits and other paperwork in their car. The state Citizen should also be prepared to go to traffic court and explain it to the judge.”

George Mercier offers his view on invisible contracts, on the license, and using ‘the king’s’ highway:

“Yes, an unknown and invisible Highway Contract was actually in effect when I was driving around without a License in effect; a contract was in effect that my legal Patriot mentors had specifically and adamantly told me did not exist (since I was not using the Highways for a Commercial purpose and my Driver’s License did not exist). But the Patriot advisors were point-blank wrong, and the contract did exist, as I will explain later; and the contract was invisible.” Read more in Invisible Contracts (long book, all online, and see the license part towards the end)

Also see:

One thought on “Traveling versus driving – no license needed (video proof)

  1. Could you please show any laws and/or court cases which substantiate these claims? Are there any court cases where such people have been taken to court and prevailed? This sounds like the same old SovCit (or whatever you want to call it this year) claims which have failed for decades. Did this person file suit and win? From everything I see is a SovCit or wannabee who just wears down the cops who are attempting to avoid a confrontation. At no point does the officer concede that anything the guy says is correct. I have been searching for over a decade to find the first court case where these claims are recognized as valid and prevail. Could you please provide me with any you are aware of?
    Thank you

Leave a Reply

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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.