2024 New Jersey Revised Statutes Title 39 - Motor Vehicles and Traffic Regulation Se"Intersection" means the area embraced within the prolongation of the lateral curb lines or, if none, the lateral boundary lines of two or more highways which join one another at an angle, whether or not one such highway crosses another.ction 39:1-1 - Words and phrases defined.'

 Randy ....

Have you considered that the patriot crap is coming from one or more of our international enemies, something like Tokyo Rose in WWII?

America is being demoralized by the patriot crap.
Of that there can be no debate.

From my point of view, however, it seems like nobody cares to work with me to fight the REAL PROBLEM in this nation, which is public legal ignorance, ESPECIALLY IGNORANCE ABOUT PROCEDURE AND EVIDENCE TACTICS that could be empowering Americans to MAKE AMERICA WISE AGAIN.

Useful angle which can be inverted, seems, by asking in writing for their delegated authority of instigating a payable "tax" or "revenue" to the state/county/muni. if acting as agent in this capacity, citing and potentially threatening arrest for 'no show', how does an executive office inferior employed acquire such authority. where is this in writing? is it not reasonable to request in the face of a unilateral demand?

Lavode has a point, the supreme court has determined that driving a vehicle of any type is a privileges', not a right. Show me any cases that says otherwise

I didn’t lose because of MY being truthful. I had solid arguments. Legal Beagles can say what they want in generalizations. That doesn’t make it fact for every case. Generalizations are conclusory. That’s the exact same thing we are all being accused of in our filings — that they are conclusory. We need to learn NOT to be conclusory in our every day writings so that it doesn’t spill over into our filings.

So don’t be sorry — be specific, particular, accurate and truthful.

Truth and reality does exist. Logic is necessary to understand truth and reality.

What you’re trying to justify is insanity because insanity is the antithesis of truth. You can’t have facts without knowledge. People are playing guessing games.

How can anyone win arguments if they can’t even discern fiction from fact? Or a logical fallacy from a logical argument based on truth?

You should read Dr Graves essay on Natural law. The name of the game is jurisprudence. Insanity has nothing to do with

This is exactly the problem. The BAR attorneys ARE winning arguments using illogical arguments AND conclusory statements that are fiction. This is exactly what happened to me. I used logic and facts, and lost to BAR attorneys using illogical non-sensical arguments and non-fiction. It is just amazing. We are definitely in the world the scriptures describe where right and wrong are indiscernible.

"Truth" does not win cases. Successful arguments win cases. Fact.
Sorry, not sorry. The beagles reminds us of this constantly. Won't get into the cliche "justice is blind" and blah blah.. cos it ain't. However, truth is for the dinner party convo. Well presented facts get us closer to the end field. That's just the way it is.

You assume there is NO truth! My papers contained truth! Therefore there CAN be justice! Yes?

But, you’re ignoring Dr Graves teaching about natural law. Where can there be justice if there’s no truth? This is a reasonable question.

Ignorance is our enemy and the enemy of justice. We can’t know anything without logic. Men and women are logical entities, we aren’t concepts. We can’t get a concept on the stand and ask them questions in court.

Logic guides us to truth and liberty. God gave us liberty when we were created. Biology isn’t a social construct.

It is. But I think we as a group can and should start piecing things together and helping each other frame things correctly in the appellate level so that we can get our “class” of citizens heard in SCOTUS! We are not receiving justice. And it is NOT because of our arguments, our knowledge of the law or our writings. It is because of bias in the state courts all the way to the appellate level. I don’t believe that suing all the judges is the correct course of action. I do believe that with perseverance and working together, we can make some changes through the Supreme Court of US. And I think that is the only way we will get any justice in the future.

Truth and reality does exist. Logic is necessary to understand truth and reality.

What you’re trying to justify is insanity because insanity is the antithesis of truth. You can’t have facts without knowledge. People are playing guessing games.

How can anyone win arguments if they can’t even discern fiction from fact? Or a logical fallacy from a logical argument based on truth?

You should read Dr Graves essay on Natural law. The name of the game is jurisprudence. Insanity has nothing to do with prudence.

This is why the social sciences is a problem because it involves fiction, not reality. It involves insanity instead of prudence.

The BAR attorneys are like the man behind the curtain in the Wizard of Oz. They hide behind tyranny and ignorance so that people are defeated.

To them, it’s a zero sum game. They benefit off of the loss of others.

Nelda,
 Logic is part of the Trivium method. You can find the etymology for both the word, Trivium and the word Quadrivium.

Also, there’s a difference between logic and rhetoric. Rhetoric is the art of communication and logic is the art of thinking.

This is relevant to legal battles since we’re using words. I just thought I would share this with you and the group since it’s valuable information to know. This topic isn’t discussed enough.

I agree with what you’re saying, but there’s some who are playing a different game based on self interest.

If more people had an interest in the classical liberal arts, we wouldn’t be in this situation. We would have truth and liberty.09:56 AM