That is why I put plates on my Avlanche that say, "Dead Heading." It gives notice that I am not operating in commerce and although I have entered into a commercial agreement with the state which will allow me to use the highways in comomerce, the dead heaing plates gives notice that I am not operating under that contract. Being forced to display evidence of a private commercial contract would violate my 4th amentment right to privacy of my papers.
put the plates on the suburban so all my cars and trucks are privet now, let the games begin
My Avalanche is plated. I can operate it in commerce if I want to. I have a valid driver's license and can use it in commerce if I choose. So, the only violation they can show is a failure to publicly display evidence of a private contract. I am looking forward to that fight, but the last time the DPS pulled me over, they wrote a warning, and I had a fit. I demanded my ticket, even demanded that the officer take off his chicken suit.
They know what the law is. They just want to ignore it and coerce you into buying their bullshit.
The Rule of Law Radio show from 2026/01/30 is now in the archives!
https://t.me/ROLRshow/357
The Rule of Law Radio show from 2026/01/29 is now in the archives!
https://t.me/ROLRshow/356
but there are a lot of cases that say that is what is used in a municipal court. Most likely even with them using an unlawful complaint., it is probably void for vagueness or somehow unconstitutional since they most of the time parrot the language in the ordinance. But, have you seen one case that was won or overturned using the argument about the primary pleadings in lieu of a complaint?
yes, the Huynh opinion came out in 1995, relying on an unconstitutional provision (TCCP 45.01) that used to exist in 1995.
our legislature fixed that problem by repealing the unconstitutional provision in its entirety, effective 1999.
every single bar attorney from 1999 to the present day continues to rely on that REPEALED statute as if it still exists, evidently in a vain attempt to pretend there's some legitimacy or legal support for their unlawful de facto pattern and practice to deprive defendants of the due process of law.
EDIT: is that what you were wondering about?
Comments
Post a Comment