Re: The Right of Locomotion
You are accessing this site in a read-only mode. For full access to all member benefits, including message posting, please login or register. Registration is completely free, simple, and takes only a few seconds.
Login |
Free CarKB.com registration |
Whole discussion thread
The message you are replying to and its parents are listed in the reverse order with the most recent posts first. This might not be the whole discussion thread. To read all the messages in this thread please click here.
Re: The Right of Locomotion
| proffsl | 20 Jul 2005 09:22 |
Is it really so difficult to shake off the harness? Clearly, in a knee jerk fashon, you fealt the need to try to humiliate me. But, for who's benefit, for what purpose, and in who's eyes? I present you with evidence of my claim, you offer no counter evidence of any sort, then come off with some cutesy limerick! Are you under the impression you proved anything to anybody, other than the ability to plagerize cutesy limericks?
You have lived in this harness for so long, you are afraid to live without it, you are afraid to consider living without it, and to avoid doing that, you are afraid to even admit the harness exists! And, in your case, plagiarizing cutesy limericks is a defense mechanism, protecting you from unwanted thought and observations.
You probably wouldn't dare follow it, but this is a link to a site where the 1937 Detroit Michigan Driver's Handbook is shown. At the time of the publishing of this handbook, "driving" was still openly admitted by Cities and States as a Right. http://www.us-highways.com/trtdr00.htm
Let's try another approach at this. Surely you would have to admit our Constitution recognizes our Personal Right to Liberty. And, surely you would have to admit that this implies a Personal Right to Travel on Public Highways, Roads, Paths, and other Public Right of Ways. If you can't admit even this, then I can only think you humiliate yourself.
Assuming you admit we have the Personal Right to Travel on our Public Highways, in what manner should we Travel on them other than the Ordinary (the usual) manner of Travel on them? Should we be limited to only extraordinary manners of Travel on them, which in turn may be, and are in many places, prohibited because they obstruct the ordinary manner of Travel?
And, how can you have a Right to something extraordinary which can be prohibited because it obstructs the ordinary? You can't! If there must be a choice between the Ordinary manner of Travel and a certain extraordinary manner of Travel, the Right must always go with the Ordinary manner of Travel.
If you have the Right to Travel on Public Highways, Roads, Paths and other Public Right of Ways, then you have the Right to Travel on Public Highways, and you have the Right to Travel on Public Roads, and you have the Right to Travel on Public Paths, and you have the Right to Travel on other Public Right of Ways.
If you have the Right to Travel on Public Highways, then, formost, you have the Right to Travel on them in the manner Ordinarly used on them. The Ordinary manner yesterday was the Ordinary manner yesterday. The Ordinary manner today is the Ordinary manner today. The Ordinary manner tomorrow will be the Ordinary manner tomorrow.
We have the Right to the Ordinary manner of Travel used on any particular stretch of Public Highway, Road, Path or other Public Right of Way at any particular time.
|
| Bernard Farquart | 20 Jul 2005 05:48 |
snip whine
If wishes were fishes, you sure would have a nice dinner, huh?
|
| proffsl | 20 Jul 2005 03:20 |
The US Supreme Court has recognized our Right of Locomotion:
"Undoubtedly the right of locomotion, the right to remove from one place to another according to inclination, is an attribute of personal liberty, and the right, ordinarily, of free transit from or through the territory of any state is a right secured by the 14th Amendment and by other provisions of the Constitution." - Williams v. Fears, 179 U.S. 270 (1900) - http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=179&invol=270#274
Examine this carefully. This is YOUR Right. You NEED to Understand EXACTLY WHAT is your Right.
Note: "and the right, ordinarly"
Which Right? "of locomotion", "to remove from one place to another", "of personal liberty", "of free transit". AKA: Personal Travel.
How? "ordinarly".
Where? "from or through the territory of any state". AKA: Public Property.
We have the Right of Locomotion Ordinarly used for Personal Travel on Public Property.
Even expressed in this form, from experience debating this issue, there will be those who still don't understand what their Right is.
Let me rephrase it. On any particular stretch of Public Property, you have a Right to use WHATEVER Locomotion is Ordinarly used on that stretch.
On Public Sidewalks, the Locomotion Ordinarly used is Walking, and we have a Right to Walk on Public Sidewalks.
On Public Biketrails, the Locomotion Ordinarly used is Bikes, and we have a Right to Bike on Public Biketrails.
What is the Locomotion Ordinarly used for Personal Travel on our Public Highways?
It is, of course, the Automobile.
On Public Highways, the Locomotion Ordinarly used is the Auto, and we have a Right to use Autos on Public Highways.
|
Quick links:
|
|
|