[ale] OT: U.S. National Identity Cards All But Law

[ChangingLINKS.com]

On Thursday May 12 2005 12:45, Aditya Srinivasan wrote:
> On Thu, 12 May 2005, Michael B. Trausch wrote:
> > And you can (if you know the right affirmative legal defense) even drive
> > (regularly) on a State ID so long as you're not a taxi driver, chauffer
> > (sp?), or other driver making money for the actual driving.
>
> So what is the legal defense ?
>
>
> Thanks,
> sriad

Be careful.
I used to be active in what is known as "the patriot movement" where such 
legal defenses are discussed and attempted. Unfortunately, much of the 
culture and information came from charismatic con artists.

Example: http://home.hiwaay.net/~becraft/Scams.htm
Also see: http://www.quatlosers.com/


In cases like this, it is not only important to ask "what is the legal 
defense" but to also ask for case cites to support the argument. 
Finally, do not believe what the person providing you the case cites says they 
represent. You should review the cases yourself (and/or get a lawyer to help 
you understand the material).

There is good information and theories out there . . . but it is extremely 
rare. In fact, you can go for years believing a position is valid only to 
find out later that it is not. 

Think about this: If the "patriot movement" had perfected the defense that 
only commercial drivers needed a driver's license - the legal argument would 
be widespread by now. Of course to this, the most entrenched will claim the 
successful cases have been sealed. ;)

Instead of finding support for the driver's license theory, I can point to 
people like Joe Diambrosio(sp) in Georgia who have dug their heals in, spent 
NUMEROUS hours doing legal research only to spend days in jail and ultimately 
fail to prevail with the legal theories.
-- 
Wishing you Happiness, Joy, and Laughter,
Drew Brown
http://www.ChangingLINKS.com