6063 Version 1.1 Date: Sun Nov 9, 2003 12:51 pm. Revised November 16, 2003
Class Project: F.U. Movement to Eliminate Abusive Licensing
Subject: We are Fed Up. F.U. Its on! Five aspects of the movement including legislation.
This page is: www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/fu.html
Related pages:
Lawyerdude’s complete list of class projects: www.lawyerdude.8k.com/projects.html
Licensing of speech: brief 3789: www.lawyerdude.8k.com/3789.html
Speech from 1644 re: Licensing of printing presses: http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/areopagitica.html
Petition for injunction against police for Pearl in North Dakota: http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/6059.html
General navigational links:
Lawyerdude’s most important page. His top 10 lists: http://www.lawyerdude.8m.com/5459.html
Back to www.lawyerdude.8m.com Or my mirror site: www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com
Telephone Lawyerdude: 805 652 0334
Back to Lawyerdude's discussion group: www.groups.yahoo.com/group/the_lawyerdude
Email lawyerdude: dlawyerdude@hotmail.com
Back to lawyerdude's briefs: www.circuitlawyer.8m.com
Back to Lawyerdude's Contemporary Constitutional Issues:
http://www.circuitlawyer.8m.com/5693.html
The Steve 762 program to fight traffic tickets: http://www.circuitlawyer.8m.com/5695.html
List of all pages uploaded by Lawyerdude in the past few months updated 27 June 03: http://www.circuitlawyer.8m.com/5673.html
Lawyerdude's links page: www.lawyerdude.8m.com/links.html
Movement to Eliminate Abusive Licensing
Subject: We are Fed Up. F.U. Its on! Five aspects of the movement including legislation
In the beginning, corporations were chartered only upon petition to the legislature. The robber barons corrupted our system of corporations in three ways:
1. They permitted corporations to become persons by utilizing the headnote of written by publisher’s employee in the case of http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/6048.html See my analysis of this problem at http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/corporations.html
2. The states begin to sell corporations. They changed the law so that rather than chartering corporations, the government would merely sell them.
3. In recent years they created the LLC, the limited liability corporation, thereby eliminating the threat of judicial redress to those injured by corporations and thereby making it useless to pierce the corporate veil for underfunded abusive corporations.
The humans who are employed by our various governmental corporations are using these governmental corporations as profit centers to fund their pension plans and to otherwise feather their own nest. In recent years they have blatantly conspired using such conspiratorial organizations as “The Association of County Governments” and other similarly named corporations whose sole purpose is to oppress us by empowering them.
By stealthy encroachment an immoral communication with the legislature our government agencies/ corporations have taken more and more of our money to pay their own members until today they, the government workers are in the majority! Governments want corporate freedom. They want to provide a better life for their employees. They seek to be like civilian corporations; the want the power that goes to a profit center. To that end they have by stealthy encroachment put a price tag on what we originally expected to be free - - - service from our government employees. They have by stealthy encroachment interposed tollbooths between the citizens and the services they expect from government agencies. Immoral government agencies acting in the interest of their employees have recognized that they can increase their power and profit by selling every sort of government service. They have realized that they can, illegally or not, invent a license for every sort of human activity. They began with the more lucrative activities, always disguising their greed by inventing a pretextual public need that is supposedly served by their new license. Governments created the market for licenses by requiring us to have licenses. They invented a useless license. They take away our rights; they sell them back to us as licenses! In the case of lawyers, they only speak, write, petition, and counsel. All these rights are guaranteed in the constitution. They may not be abridged. Licensing is an abridgment of this right, an unconstitutional abridgment! See my brief #3789 on that subject: http://www.lawyerdude.8k.com/3789.html or http://www.lawyerdude.8m.com/3789.html - which is the mirror site.
Two good examples are driving and lawyering. In both cases the public is served by merely requiring that applicants pass a proficiency test. In the beginning the proficiency test was the limit of government intrusion.
During the hey day of the robber barons Andrew Carnegie created a near monopoly in the licensing of lawyers by requiring that all lawyers be graduates of schools licensed by his American Bar Association.
Damage has been done by this monopoly. The monopolistic fees and practices are now infecting our local rules and our statutes - like a computer virus. The monopolies bribe our judges with junkets to resorts and playground of the gluttonous.
Toward a solution we must refuse to permit corporations (including governments) to communicate with our legislative bodies! The legislature must listen to humans - not corporations!
The 2nd example of abusive licensing is the driver license. This creature evolved by stealthy encroachment at the behest of the government agency who invented this license and markets it in order to raise money to pay the members of this self-interest profit center.
The DMV in California is a profit center for California. Just like a knight, they earn a profit for their king and thereby ensure their favor. In California they formerly had a pie chart displayed at our local DMV that showed that the DMV is a profit center. This pie chart is not there anymore.
The DMV cooperates with its fellow government agencies. It takes away your license if you don’t pay child support. This bad law is gradually being tempered but it should have not passed in the first place. The driver should not need a license. He should merely be required to prove his proficiency if challenged legally, but in a free country who would challenge this except in the case of a car crash. This driver license agency is used as a pretext to invite scrutiny and government date collection.
It is the driver licence that we address in this F.U. project.
We ask your participation as follows:
As I see it, it is like a football game. We have several positions to play in this movement/ game:
Position #1. Drivers. We have those folks who are already driving without license. For those people we need to provide information and fast effective litigation support including fast effective retaliatory section 1983 lawsuits. We should also make sure that they have a plan and some paperwork to show to the officer. The paperwork may say that they are exercising their right to remain silent - but why. It may be more effective to simply remain silent - like Steve762 does. See this page: http://www.circuitlawyer.8m.com/5695.html We may want to establish an 800 number for people to call from jail. That is easy to do. Then we must have some people trained and ready to contact the jail/ court and file by fax so that the court will release the people on bail.
Position #2. People to answer the 800 number and fax paperwork to the jail/ night judge/ court. The paperwork will include our latest omnibus brief - which is #6059 until Debra writes the improved version.
Position #3. Writ writers like Debra and me.
Position #4. Publicists who will send our program plans to affiliated groups and the media - especially in the home town where one of our group has been ticketed. This will require finding somebody in our group who has a list of media connection. In the alternative we can find the name of the local newspaper from the 800call from the jail - or whenever the call or email comes in from the ticketed driver.
Position #5. Legislative staff to write a bills and submit them to the legislatures in each state. One bill may be called the "uniform drivers bill of rights" and it may say something like this: The legislature hereby finds that driving is essential. To that end it finds that person from foreign countries are permitted to drive here without testing and licensing while our own people suffer bureaucratic abuse. Henceforth a driver in this state who has passed a driver test shall be "certified". Certified drivers may drive without license. Driver shall not be checked for driver license. Prosecution of an offending driver shall be done without violation of the rights of the driver. There shall be no more traffic stops except in the case of clear and present public safety. Henceforth the driver may be summoned to court by the prosecutor - not the clerk. Traffic tickets are hereby abolished. Nothing in this act prevents a prosecutor from seeking an injunction against a driver in the interest of public safety on the road once a clear and present danger is established. California hereby establishes the aubobahn system of driving without speed limit in the leftmost lane. The highway patrol is hereby relegated to investigating crashes and matters of clear and present public safety. The legislature hereby recognizes two classes of drivers: Class one consists of persons driving for their own benefit; to them we issue this safe harbor asset forth above. Class two consists of clearly commercial vehicles; to that class we permit reasonable preventive inspections to ensure good brakes and other safety features. The second act might be called the "Relief from License Oppression act". The legislature finds that licenses have been abused in this state to the point that some people cannot engage in the profession of law and cannot drive due to having offended the state. To that end we hereby pass this relief act. It shall be the police of this state to certify rather than license. Once a lawyer has been certified, he shall be free to practice unless he presents a clear and present danger. The same shall be true for drivers and everybody.
This movement began with the following post from Lawyer Debra in North Dakota:
Debra said: I agree that a MOVEMENT ought to be started--but to succeed--
individual freedom fighters must STOP slaughtering themselves on the
altar of stupidity. I advocate "smart litigation."
I am accepting Lawyerdude's challenge to rewrite his brief concerning
the unalienable right to locomotion. I am researching and preparing
a petition for declaratory judgment and injunctive relief and brief in
support. The petition will ask the court to declare the state
licensing law unconstitutional and will seek an injunction that
estops the state government from enforcing the licensing law. In
North Dakota, if you've been paying attention, the state licensing
law is N.D.C.C. Section 39-06-01.
The petition and brief will be adaptable for universal use in every
state of the Union simply by plugging in the correct information. In
North Dakota, the declaration will request that N.D.C.C. Section 39-
06-01 be declared unconstitutional and the state enjoined from
enforcing said statute--but people in other states may simply
substitute the citation for their state licensing law.
I think the acronym of the movement should be "F.U." for "Fed Up!" or
something similar--directed at government's OVERREGULATION of our
lives.
The goal of the movement should be restoration of freedom--one step
or project at a time. The success of the movement would require MASS
action--drawing MASS attention throughout the nation in order to
thwart inherent individual apathy. The movement ought to educate
people to appreciate their individual freedoms--rather than to sit by
complacently as they unwittingly surrender their rights under the
guise of "promoting the public welfare."
If you read the Onion satire--the link was recently provided by
another member of this group--then you will see that's it's really
not a satire at all, but rather a sad commentary on our society. We
have individuals and large groups of people begging the government to
take away our rights: "Please regulate me, regulate me! Take away
our personal autonomy for our own good." Big Brother has answered
the call and has become the grand shepherd--herding the willfully
blind sheeple to the slaughter houses where our rights are
eviscerated.
The first freedom project would be for several F.U. movement members
in every state in the Union to simultaneously file petitions for
declaratory & injunctive relief concerning state licensing laws.
This ought to take place the first week of July 2004 in honor of the
signing of the Declaration of Independence. Essentially, actions
concerning the same subject matter would be pending in every state and
the courts will be required to declare state licensing laws either
valid or invalid. The eyes of the nation will be on these courts--
and the United States Supreme Court will have no choice but to review
these cases (in one consolidated decision) and give us the answer we
seek: are we individuals with unalienable rights--or are we
eviscerated sheeple?
If we are the former--then freedom prevails. If we are proclaimed to
be the latter, then the representatives of our government will be
placed on notice that the people have retained the right to alter or
abolish government and establish a new government that is more likely
to secure our freedom from oppression.
Here is Part I of the Brief:
I. Government's paramount purpose is to secure unalienable rights.
Our founding fathers believed that individual freedom from tyranny
and oppression was the most valuable commodity of human life.
Without freedom—without personal autonomy—life is not worth living.
The Declaration of Independence embodies this firm belief:
"WE hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created
equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain
unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the
Pursuit of Happiness -- That to secure these Rights, Governments are
instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of
the Governed, that whenever any Form of Government becomes
destructive of these Ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or
to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its Foundation
on such Principles, and organizing its Powers in such Form, as to
them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."
The birthright of every American citizen to individual sovereignty
was sanctified on the bloody battlefields of the revolution. It is
beyond dispute that our form of Government was instituted to secure
unalienable rights to all individuals on an equal basis, among those
rights are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Our
forefathers chose the describing word "unalienable" as a
fortification. It eliminates any doubt that we are born with rights
(including, but not limited to life, liberty, and the pursuit of
happiness) that are absolute and may not be alienated from any
individual. The phrase "unalienable rights" means exactly what it
says. No other person or group of people nor any organized
government may take away or dilute the rights of an individual under
the premise that doing so is best for the common welfare.
The Preamble of our Constitution clearly expounds upon the earlier
Declaration and provides the foundation upon which the Supreme Law of
the Land was built:
"We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect
union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for
the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the
blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and
establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
Although government is designed, in part, to promote the general
welfare of the people as a whole, its paramount purpose is to secure
(not merely promote) the blessings of liberty to the founders of this
country and all those who were born and came after them. The
word "promote" means to further or advance. By the consent of the
people, the government was granted "just" power to promote the
general welfare (e.g., the prosperity) of the people. However, the
people do not need government to further or advance their individual
rights because these rights are complete and whole upon birth.
People created government to secure the rights that they were born
with upon leaving their mothers' wombs. The word "secure" means to
make certain from doubt and to make free from risk of loss. Thus, it
is beyond dispute that government may not take away or dilute
individual rights through laws and regulations under the guise that
doing so promotes the general welfare.
The government's secondary duty to promote the general welfare does
not trump the government's paramount duty to secure the unalienable
rights of individuals. If the government promotes the general welfare
through regulation that requires individuals to sacrifice their
rights or portions thereof, then the government is not exercising
the "just" powers that it was granted. Rather, the government is
engaging in injustice. When government becomes destructive to its
paramount purpose, the representatives of our government should be
forever mindful that the people retained the power to alter or
abolish government.
II. The right of locomotion is an unalienable right.
All Americans have unalienable rights to life, liberty, and the
pursuit of happiness. These rights are rendered meaningless if the
government fails to recognize the concomitant right to locomotion.
Without the ability to move freely within society, an individual
cannot sustain life, cannot exercise liberty, and cannot pursue
happiness.
[This is where I take the best of lawyerdude's 40 page brief and
incorporate it in Part II of the brief.....]
4.