cuchulainn said:
For better or worse, We The People have granted the governemnt the power to build and run the roads.
They are Public raods, built with Public funds.
“It is well-established law that the highways of the state are public property; and their primary and preferred use is for private purposes...”
Stephenson v. Binford 287 U.S. 251, 264, et al.
“It is settled that the streets of a city belong to the people of a state and the use thereof is an inalienable right of every citizen of the state.”
Whyte v. City of Sacramento, 165 Cal. App.534, 547.
tmajors said:
Driving is a privilege as opposed to a right, and a privilege that quite frankly is not revoked enough.
“No state government entity has the power to allow or deny passage on the highways, byways, nor waterways... transporting his vehicles and personal property for either recreation or business, but by being subject only to local regulation, i.e., safety, caution, traffic lights, speed limits, etc. Travel is not a privilege requiring licensing, vehicle registration, or forced insurance.”
Chicago Coach Co. v. City of Chicago, 337 Ill. 200, 169 N.E. 22.
“Even the legislature has no power to deny to a citizen the right to travel upon the highway and transport his property in the ordinary course of his business or pleasure, though this right may be regulated in accordance with public interest and convenience.”
ibid at 206.
“The use of the highway for the purpose of travel and transportation is not a mere privilege, but a common fundamental right of which the public and individuals cannot rightfully be deprived.”
ibid at 221.
cuchulainn said:
Don't want to register your car? Don't want a license? Drive only on private roads.
“The assertion of federal rights, when plainly and reasonably made, is not to be defeated under the name of local practice.”
Davis v. Wechsler, 263 US 22, at 24.
“The right of the citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, either by carriage or by automobile, is not a mere privilege which a city may prohibit or permit at will, but a common law right which he has under the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”
Thompson v. Smith, 154 SE 579.
“A carriage is peculiarly a family or household article. It contributes in a large degree to the health, convenience, comfort, and welfare of the householder or of the family.”
Arthur v Morgan, 113 U.S. 495, 500, 5 S.Ct. 241, 243 (S.D. NY 1884).
“The Supreme Court, in
Arthur v. Morgan, 112 U.S. 495, 5 S.Ct. 241, 28 L.Ed. 825, held that carriages were properly classified as household effects, and we see no reason that automobiles should not be similarly disposed of.”
Hillhouse v United States, 152 F. 163, 164 (2nd Cir. 1907).
The only real and legal distinction made (by the Courts) is one of personal use and commercial use.
The only real distinction of registering your vehicle or obtaining a Drivers License, is that you have bought into a state controlled method of revenue raising, by attesting that you are driving as a commercial endeavor and can therefore be regulated.
“If the state converts a liberty into a privilege the citizen can engage in the right with impunity.”
Shuttlesworth v. Birmingham (1963) 373 U.S. 262.
In
Marchetti v. U.S., 390 US 39,57; See v Seattle, 387 US 541, the Court reiterated what it said in
U.S. v Miller, “The exercise of a constitutional right cannot be the basis of a crime.”
I suspect that the NFA could be attacked along the same lines, once
Parker is upheld and becomes precedent.