12Bravo wrote on 05/30/13 at 13:42:59:NO, travel is a RIGHT. The Supreme Court has said so.
http://yhvh.name/MISSION_AID/RIGHT_TO_DRIVE_NO_LICENSE.pdfU.S. Supreme Court says No License Necessary
To Drive Automobile On Public Highways/Streets
No License Is Necessary
Copy and Share Freely
YHVH.name
1
1
U.S. SUPREME COURT
AND OTHER HIGH COURT
CITATIONS PROVING THAT
NO LICENSE IS NECESSARY FOR
NORMAL
USE OF AN AUTOMOBILE ON COMMON WAYS
"The
right
of a citizen to travel upon the public hi
ghways and to transport his property thereon, by horse
-
drawn carriage, wagon, or
automobile
, is
not a mere privilege which may be permitted or prohibited at
will,
but a
common right
which he has under his right to life,
liberty
and the pursuit of happiness. Under
this constitutional guaranty one may, therefore, under normal conditions
, travel at his inclination
along the
public highways
or in public places, and while conducting himself in an orderly and decent manner, neither
interfering with nor disturbing another's rights, he will be
protected,
not only in his person, but in his
safe
conduct
."
Thompson v.Smith, 154 SE 579, 11 American Jurisprudence, Constitutional Law, section 329, page 1135
"The right of the Citizen to trav
el upon the
public
highways
and to transport his property thereon,
in the ordinary course of life and
business
, is a common
right which he has under the right to enjoy
life and
liberty, to acquire and possess property, and to pursue happiness and safety. I
t includes the
right, in so doing, to use the ordinary and usual conveyances of the day, and under the existing
modes of travel,
includes
the right to drive a horse drawn carriage or
wagon thereon or to
operate
an
automobile
thereon, for the usual and ordi
nary purpose of
life and
business
."
-
Thompson vs. Smith, supra.;
Teche Lines vs. Danforth, Miss., 12 S.2d 784
"... the
right
of the citizen to
drive
on a
public street
with freedom from police interference... is a
fundamental
constitutional
right
"
-
White,
97 Cal.App.3d.141, 158 Cal.Rptr. 562, 566
-
67 (1979)
“citizens have a
right
to
drive
upon the public streets of the District of Columbia or any other city
absent a constitutionally sound reason for limiting their access.”
Caneisha Mills v. D.C.
2009
“
The
use of the
automobile
as a necessary adjunct to the earning of a livelihood in modern life
requires us in the interest of realism to conclude that the RIGHT to use an
automobile
on the
public highways
partakes of the nature of a liberty within the meaning
of the Constitutional
guarantees. . .
”
Berberian v. Lussier (1958) 139 A2d 869,
872
, See also: Schecter v. Killingsworth, 380 P.2d 136, 140; 93 Ariz. 273 (1963).
“
The right to operate a
motor vehicle
[an automobile] upon the public streets and highways is not a
mere privilege. It is a right of liberty, the enjoyment of which is protected by the guarantees of the
federal and state constitutions.
”
Adams v. City of Pocatello, 416 P.2d 46, 48; 91 Idaho 99
(1966).
“A traveler has an
equal right
to employ an
automobile
as a means of transportation and to occupy the public
highways with other vehicles in common use.”
Campbell v. Walker, 78 Atl. 601, 603, 2 Boyce (Del.) 41.
“
The owner of an automobile has the
same right as the owner of other vehicles to use the highway,* * * A
traveler on foot has the
same right
to the use of the public highways as an
automobile
or any other
vehicle
.
”
Simeone v. Lindsay, 65 Atl. 778, 779; Hannigan v. Wright, 63 Atl. 234, 236.
"The RIGHT of the citizen to
DRIVE
on the public street
with freedom from
police interference,
unless he is engaged i
n suspicious conduct associated
in some manner with criminality is a
FUNDAME
NTAL CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT which
must be protected by the
courts."
People
v. Horton
14 Cal. App. 3rd 667
(1971)
“
The right to make use of an
automobil
e as a
vehicle
of travel long the highways of the state, is no longer
an open question. The owners thereof have the
same rights
in the roads and streets as the dr
ivers of horses
or those riding a bicycle or traveling in some other
vehicle
.
”
House v. Cramer, 112 N.W. 3; 134 Iowa 374; Farnsworth v. Tampa Electric Co. 57 So.
233, 237, 62 Fla. 166.
“
The
automobile
may be used with safety to others users of the highway, and in its proper use upon
the highways there is an
equal right
with the users of other vehicles properly upon the highways.
The law recognizes such right of use upon general principles.
Brinkman v P
acholike, 84 N.E. 762, 764, 41 Ind. App. 662, 666.
“
The law does not denounce
motor carriages
, as such, on public ways.
T
hey have an
equal right
with other vehicles in
common use to oc
cupy the streets and roads.
It is improper to say that the driver of the horse has rights in the roads
superior to the
driver of the automobile
. Both have the
right
to use the easement.
You people have been TOLD how to think,,, very few of my fellow Americans understand what a free person is.
”
Indiana Springs Co. v. Brown, 165
Pages: 
