420chan now has a web-based IRC client available, right here
Leave these fields empty (spam trap):
Name
You can leave this blank to post anonymously, or you can create a Tripcode by using the float Name#Password
A subject is required when posting a new thread
Subject
Comment
[*]Italic Text[/*]
[**]Bold Text[/**]
[~]Taimapedia Article[/~]
[%]Spoiler Text[/%]
>Highlight/Quote Text
[pre]Preformatted & Monospace text[/pre]
1. Numbered lists become ordered lists
* Bulleted lists become unordered lists
File

Sandwich


Community Updates

420chan now supports HTTPS! If you find any issues, you may report them in this thread
Alamo scam by Hugh Feddlehall - Thu, 09 Nov 2017 10:36:30 EST ID:M8PIkmM2 No.45959 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1510241790163.png -(693070B / 676.83KB, 715x873) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 693070
Hi guys, I need a bit of advice. A friend of mine visited LA this summer, he rented a car from the Alamo company. He received a letter not long ago (he lives in Slovakia) that the car was issued a parking ticket which they paid for him and now they want around $107 from him. I have done some Googling and this fucking company seem to operate this way a lot, they rent a car and when the person returns it, they will send them a bill do repair hail damages or some shit and are asking hundreds, if not thousands of dollars. Friend is pretty sure he did not park in a way that would result in a ticket.

What would you recommend him to do? If he wrote them and demanded a copy of the parking ticket so that the car plate and date of the incident is visible, are they obliged to send it to him or something? Or should he simply ignore it? They have his credit card info and he probably does not want to get charged $500 in half a year due to some fees and interest adding up or some shit.

Since I don't know LA and I don't know the US, I'm not really sure if this would be a good idea, but I have found this page: http://ladot.lacity.org/contact-us
and I was thinking I would send them the invoice number, license plate and date (from the letter) and ask them if they have indeed issued that ticket and if Alamo had paid it? Just to know for sure that those pricks didn't make it all up.

Thank you for any help or insight.
>>
David Sollerwill - Thu, 09 Nov 2017 17:39:14 EST ID:CRMkmZtN No.45960 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Alamo is a subsidiary of a publicly traded company. Your friend was ticketed and it's unlikely that it was an error. According to the letter, Alamo should already have charged his credit card so his immediate option is to dispute the charge or pay it.


How much should I expect to pay? by Ernest Caffingford - Mon, 20 Mar 2017 05:24:11 EST ID:w9qlNc4Q No.45788 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1490001851269.jpg -(33421B / 32.64KB, 500x548) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 33421
I got caught going way too fast on a rural route. I was going 80 in a 60 and got pulled by an undercover car.

I've decided it's worth it to get a lawyer to try and plead my way into traffic school. I'm actually feeling pretty remorseful about it, I'm just depressed and driving through rural areas is bleaker than fuck. I have no other defense.

I'm in VA, does anyone know how much I can expect to pay for a traffic lawyer?
11 posts omitted. Click Reply to view.
>>
Sidney Gallyshit - Sat, 21 Oct 2017 03:16:07 EST ID:C6JXKq0Q No.45949 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>45947
There is a reason they calibrate their radar guns. To prove in fact one was speeding the burden would have to show how fast one was actually traveling. A simple person was exceeding the speed limit doesn't cut it here.

As far as beating a speeding ticket, here there have been husband driving wife to hospital who is in labor and about to drop at any moment. And the DA has thrown out the ticket because the speeding was reasonable considering.

A faulty speedometer has gotten my associate off when he showed up with a broken speedometer able, and a receipt showing in good faith that in regard to recently a in a few days before it broke, and immediately replaced it after the ticket. Good enough? The DA was fine with it. The judge was actually very happy that person took the initiative to utilize the justice system in a positive and I might add resourceful manner.

A few days did lapse, because of no time to fix the cable. The officer was told this. The was no realistic way for the officer to verify this, nor verify when the
cable did break let alone again, if it was actually broken.

There are other instances. Yes fighting a minor ticket would be foolish unless,,
>>
Matilda Toothall - Sun, 22 Oct 2017 15:34:16 EST ID:1xEwN5jy No.45952 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>45949
>There is a reason they calibrate their radar guns. To prove in fact one was speeding the burden would have to show how fast one was actually traveling. A simple person was exceeding the speed limit doesn't cut it here.

Well for us to use radar evidence we have to show the same. I'm curious what state you're in however because that is unusual for the burden to be proving the actual speed.

The rest of your examples aren't beating a ticket, they are just justifying the speeding. I negotiate reductions all the time for people who can give me a reason to. Doesn't mean they've beaten a ticket, and having that attitude is a way to go from a reduction to having charges added (which i regularly do as well).

In your first example if the guy was being a dick in the negotiations I would add reckless endangerment and in the second I would add failure to maintain required equipment.

People should try to negotiate their tickets, but be respectful and don't demand/expect any reduction or it's not going to go well.
>>
Jarvis Hellypun - Wed, 01 Nov 2017 04:48:05 EST ID:S1ZAIy5L No.45953 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>45952
>because that is unusual for the burden to be proving the actual speed.

Not really. That is what speed guns are for. The calibraations is to ensure that the speeds is somewhat acurate. Say doing 35, in a school zone, where the speed is say 10 MPH, for say 2,000ft. It happens all the time. It has been shown over and over and over, that officers(s) did not calibrate speed guns.

Um may be accurate, it is time resource comsuming to calibrate guns every morning, evening, yet some departments do just that. MY take, a gun shoulnd not be way off if not calibrated in two days, but, it can
happen.

Case dismissed because of that. It is not uncommon, that people I guess "beat' speeeding tickets, because of miscalibration or as well not calibrating their speed guns.. It does happens pretty constantly. simply, dis your calibrate your gun that morning? (no,) enough to say get past a speeding ticket, guilty, knowingly, unknown.

Instant get off if there is no evidence of calibration. Ubless one is doinf like 80 in a 40. Just foor fact, radar guns are to be tested daily before shifts. If not, yea two days. #. a week.


Even if speed guns were calibrayted corrrectly days before, and still correct, but not matched/calibradeted before a shift, but very accurate, people can beat these cases because of this simple fact that they were not calibrated to procedure..
-
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>
Jarvis Hellypun - Wed, 01 Nov 2017 05:07:15 EST ID:S1ZAIy5L No.45954 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>45953
So, in challangeing simple exceeding speedi-limit cases, the best bet is to challange speed calibration testing. Generally before every shift, if it is not tested, it may become invalid. in reality, calibrating speed guns is trivial, but resource inrensive as well. Say one tested gun # two days before, why shud it be retested a day later? well, that is how, peole get off from speeding tickets. Simply, officer need not lie and say it was calibradiated, before traffic shift, as two days before it was fine. Records do indicate that claibration was done, when , by who, etc.

It is what it is. Know all Jr. attorney, should know, that merely exceeding a speed limit, is nothing, it proves nothing. No proof that speed limit was exceeded without proof of a radar gun, as well recomended calibrations before each shift.
As well after. These prove to be time resource comsuming.

This is the basic way folks get off from speeding ticklts. Simple but true.
>>
Jarvis Puffingkudge - Wed, 01 Nov 2017 19:02:21 EST ID:1xEwN5jy No.45957 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Prosecutor here again:

I'm in a podunk area of a deep south state and even here not calibrating speed detection devices literally never happens. I've probably resolved 10K speeding cases and i've never seen it. I've gotten radar evidence suppressed twice (for reasons other than lack of calibration) and still got convictions because the officer can testify he paced the car or did a visual estimate.

spoilers: jurors fucking hate assholes who waste jury time on speeding tickets and judges are all to happy to throw the book at idiots who fight them.


carrying prescription questions by Reuben Goodspear - Tue, 12 Sep 2017 20:40:25 EST ID:BxEchvf3 No.45920 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1505263225395.jpg -(17754B / 17.34KB, 300x450) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 17754
I am in Missouri. My friend and I are both prescribed the same drug with the same dosage. (Alzprazolam, 0.5 mg.) Ssometimes I'll front him some of my rx until he gets his filled. He then gives me an equal amount back when he gets his. The problem? Although it's the same drug, mine are round and peach and his are pink and oval. Although I've had prescription drugs where the imprints aren't written on the bottle, that's not the case with Walmart's pharmacy. If I got pulled over and searched and had the same drug of the same dosage as I take in my prescription bottle, but made by the same manufacturer, would I get in trouble? What if the label didn't say what the pills are supposed to look like?
I also have a habit of leaving the majority of my prescriptions in an extra bottle at home, and carrying with me only what I need that day, to make sure I don't lose the while script if my purse gets stolen or something. I also have a prescription for Adderall IR with which I do the same. Would I get in trouble for having a bottle that's old, or a recently filled prescription where the majority of pills are missing? The labels for the Adderall say they expire after 30 days of being filled. Would storing pills in an expired container mean that I no longer have a lawful use for them? Is putting them in a smaller container (like one of those weekly ones) illegal? Thank you.
>>
Priscilla Crinkintudge - Tue, 12 Sep 2017 21:21:11 EST ID:mTEKt3Rd No.45921 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>45920
Yeah all of that is illegal. In my state at least having pills in a pill organizer in your own home is illegal (whether anyone would be prosecuted is a different story.

Same thing will all that you said. Everything you describe above is illegal. However, whether anyone would prosecute you, who knows.

Good luck.
>>
Sidney Gallyshit - Sat, 21 Oct 2017 03:51:33 EST ID:C6JXKq0Q No.45951 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>45920
Opinion; say one gets 90 Alzprazolam a month, new script, it really would not make sense to carry all of those around all of the time. Carry around your prescription verification stub deal to prove it's your script. As for Less than what ;should' be ther, it's not the cops job to monitor possible over-usage. As for the mis-matched labeling, possibly problematic. But police all the really would see
is that you are prescribed the drug, can say it's from an older prescription.
I change pharmacies that carry different brands occasionally. I don't see they would have the ability 'really' to track down what pharmacies you use and 'investigate' when you got what brand and corrrelate with the labeling.
as for carrying loose pills. Maybe just keep a few in an old bottle just the same.


how to tell which backpage ads are cops? by Sophie Buffingterk - Tue, 01 Dec 2015 01:20:22 EST ID:qF6nKSH+ No.44870 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1448950822807.jpg -(839452B / 819.78KB, 1080x1080) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 839452
http://santabarbara.backpage.com/FemaleEscorts/b-e-t-t-e-r-than-your-g-i-r-l-f-r-i-e-n-d/4658327

For example, this right here. How can I tell if that's a pig? Is 180 for an HR with this bitch suspiciously affordable? I would 100% smash on that. I would pay 180 a day to smash that.
12 posts and 1 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
>>
Charlotte Coblingferk - Wed, 27 Sep 2017 21:39:38 EST ID:bYyRe41h No.45924 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>44929

um, they cam legally get naked. all that bs about asking if they are a cop, not being able to disrobe, that you have to actually show up after you make a call are not true. dont say anything that you are expecting, if asked state it is only companionship since you have no friends and like pretty girls. but really if they ask what you want for $$ then hang up orjust say "you know, just hang out". when meeting someone, if in doubt, let them touch your junk before you do anything.
>>
Edwin Grimstock - Thu, 28 Sep 2017 02:26:41 EST ID:9CaCcwnY No.45925 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>45924
In most places, cops and anyone else can legally touch your junk if you're inviting or allowing them to do so. And cops will do it, especially if it's through your clothes. Offering money for naked pictures is an all around smarter idea although it sounds like such a hassle that I'll bet real hookers would tell you to go fuck yourself.
>>
Eugene Doshfat - Thu, 28 Sep 2017 10:37:30 EST ID:eLF/eg0W No.45926 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>45924
I can't believe there are cops out there willing to touch some strangers dick or show their tits just for their job. Damn, them niggas must really take that shit seriously. Especially for how little cops are paid.
>>
Rebecca Fangerdit - Thu, 05 Oct 2017 19:58:37 EST ID:j/2oCiw2 No.45929 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>45926

maybe they like it
>>
Martin Dreddlehat - Thu, 19 Oct 2017 17:15:37 EST ID:Kee2HTEf No.45948 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>44929
wrong


Need information by apsavage !7pJdAZLSeo - Thu, 12 Oct 2017 13:34:13 EST ID:kvvZkdTk No.45937 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1507829653529.jpg -(654749B / 639.40KB, 1152x1920) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 654749
Ok, so here's the backstory. I went to prison in 2015 for a bunch of shit (agrravated bat, 4 simple battery, 5 simple burglary, 3rd DUI) that on 4/20/15 got plead out to 3rd DUI (5 yrs, suspend 4 w/ 5 yrs probation) and Unauthorized Entry Into an Inhabited Dwelling (6 yrs suspend 5) I got out in May of 2016 with credit for time served and in June of 16 I went back for 2nd ° Battery, Battery on a PO, Simple Battery, and Simple Burglary which were dropped with the agreement that I would have my probation revoked and serve the suspended sentence. After earning good time I got out on June 12, 2017.


Anyways, while I was serving time my uncle (70) and aunt (67) died within 2 months of each other (April/June of 16). They were both pos who have taken advantage of my grandmother for years to the tune of millions of dollars. Well my Aunt was doing all the will crap before she died (probably why she died, karmas a bitch greedy ass) and since I was locked up my grandmother FINALLY saw how shit her kids were an axed them and their no show families out of the will and made my sister executrix / trustee of her will and estate going forward as well as granting her power of attorney. This is all great, don't really care at the time etc.

Well fast forward to July of 2017 and I am busy trying to do things for my twins, their mother, my parole officer etc and while I was aware my grandmother was selling parts of 7,000 acres she owns for years it's just recently that she has been having motor/mental problems so I didn't think much when I saw she was selling her father's old home place/farm.

The problem about the land in question is that it's worth 9-11k/acre and original listing price was 300k (29 acres) at the beginning of July. She closed on that piece Tuesday for 165k. I've had SEVERAL people call me since then congratulating etc until they ask what we got for it.

Supposedly a bunch of people were willing to buy it at around 8k or even 12k for parts of it. Thankfully there is still about 1,000 acres across various parts of her lil empire that going forward I will oversee but is there any legal action I could take against the realtor/buyers? My grandmother didn't even realize she w…
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>
Eliza Criddlemudging - Fri, 13 Oct 2017 20:57:06 EST ID:R25Uyzaw No.45940 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I don't understand what you want help with. You say you're already contesting the power of attorney. You should read up on your state law to find out exactly what that takes. Selling property below market value doesn't sound good but isn't necessarily against your grandmother's best interests and depending on her mental state it's not surprising that she wouldn't know about it.
>>
Eliza Criddlemudging - Fri, 13 Oct 2017 20:59:24 EST ID:R25Uyzaw No.45941 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I don't understand what you need help with. You say you're already in the process of contesting power of attorney. You should read up on state law to find out exactly what that requires. Selling property below market value doesn't sound good, but it's not necessarily against your grandmother's best interests and depending on her mental capacity it might not be surprising that she didn't know anything about it.
>>
Eliza Criddlemudging - Fri, 13 Oct 2017 21:27:56 EST ID:R25Uyzaw No.45942 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I don't understand what you need help with. You say you're already in the process of contesting power of attorney. You should read up on state law to find out exactly what that requires. Selling property below market value doesn't sound good, but it's not necessarily against your grandmother's best interests and depending on her mental capacity it might not be surprising that she didn't know anything about it.
>>
apsavage !7pJdAZLSeo - Tue, 17 Oct 2017 16:12:02 EST ID:kvvZkdTk No.45945 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>45942

I guess I just wanted to know how reasonable it would be to bother pursuing this legally before I bother hiring a lawyer. Doesn't really matter anymore. She died.


Religious use of Psychotropic Mushrooms by Jarvis Crizzlewell - Sat, 30 Sep 2017 05:05:29 EST ID:zaca+Qtt No.45927 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1506762329729.jpg -(46778B / 45.68KB, 294x400) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 46778
I was wondering if anyone was familiar with whether or not you can use freedom of religion as a legal case for possession of psychotropic mushrooms. I live in California by the way. I unfortunately don't have any, nor am I involved in any legal matter with them, I was just curious about it. Considering all the bullshit people are getting away with doing these days and just crying "religious freedom" to get their way, I would hope that I could call upon the millennia-old commonly known concept of religious use of substances as a legitimate use of this concept.

Anyone know of this coming up, being tried before? What juries have decided?
>>
Graham Nommermutch - Sat, 30 Sep 2017 10:35:24 EST ID:1xEwN5jy No.45928 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Yeah that's just Employment Division V. Smith, one of the most seminal cases in 1st amendment law. Even if it wasn't a criminal statute (which pretty much automatically makes the 1st amendment inapplicable) you're trying to defend against, it's not going to work.


Unlawful Possession of Marijuana in NY by Barnaby Fummlefine - Mon, 18 Sep 2017 16:12:59 EST ID:D3FQbMvY No.45923 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1505765579030.jpg -(40492B / 39.54KB, 500x348) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 40492
Howdy. Have any of y'all received a UPM in NY? it seems like a pretty little deal, something like a speeding ticket. I'm just curious if theres anything I need to watch out for or avoid. Otherwise I'm just going to pay the fines and not fight the charge.


Abandoned Property by Cornelius Brarringhood - Thu, 27 Jul 2017 12:39:40 EST ID:yBlJpx2H No.45886 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1501173580408.png -(257195B / 251.17KB, 609x500) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 257195
I am buying a house in Iowa where there is a hot tub. The current owner, B, was previously selling this house on contract, and the buyer bought said hot tub. He last made a payment in January, then moved out of state has not responded to a certified letter from B who had to go through a bunch of legal bullshit to regain ownership.

From what I understand, this guy has one year to come claim his stuff, which really seems like it won't happen. Is that one year from when the certified letter was sent? It's also legally supposed to be in "storage" (I guess just sitting where it is with the cover on collecting leaves) so my real question is: Could I be in any... hot water... if I clean it up, fill it, and do some soaking with topless babes in it before it's officially mine? Chances are he won't show up, and if he does he won't care; I'd just like to know what I'm getting into.
>>
Cornelius Brarringhood - Thu, 27 Jul 2017 12:41:33 EST ID:yBlJpx2H No.45887 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Actually I mean they couldn't even find him to deliver a certified letter.
>>
Matilda Brindlefut - Sun, 30 Jul 2017 12:48:05 EST ID:8TO6geGJ No.45888 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I dunno about the law but hot tubs are an endless nightmare to keep working. Do what every other used hot tub owner does and literally sell it for 40 dollars and wash your hands of it. If you have it in your possession of course.
>>
Edward Hammlefoot - Mon, 31 Jul 2017 03:26:42 EST ID:jQqRMIfA No.45889 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>45888
certified pool operator here

chlorine is destroyed by heat, bacteria is more likely to grow in heat. you need to drain and fill it regularly because scale will form due to too many dissolved solids and heat. all around, id avoid a hot tub unless you want to constantly be checking the chemicals (im talking all the fucking time, once a day min).

another thought, a hot tub is lets say, 10 to 15 times as many gallons as a bathtub. idk if id use another persons bath water so how many times are you going to let someone use the hot tub before you switch out the water.
>>
Polly Dromblebury - Wed, 13 Sep 2017 00:25:09 EST ID:0ooUxLzL No.45922 Ignore Report Quick Reply
fucking savage ape westerners cannot conceive of the idea of showering before entering the tub


Blacked out, woke up in jail - need advice by Shitting Gonderworth - Wed, 06 Sep 2017 22:41:55 EST ID:CmGJ9czi No.45912 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1504752115907.png -(522995B / 510.74KB, 720x1280) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 522995
So last week, to cap off what had been unto that point a pleasant and regular night, I blacked out and came too in jail with an Aggravated Trespassing and Public Intoxication charge. I have no memory of what happened and, due to potential embarrasment, I waived the reading of my affadavit in court. I meet with the public defender next Friday and return to court on the 25th.

Because I do not know what happened, I have no idea if my chstge is a class A or B misdemeanor. I am in Tennessee and have no prior criminal record. Can anyone here tell me what kind of potential penalties I'm looking at, as well as thr possibility of a diversion? Thanks all.
>>
Shitting Gonderworth - Wed, 06 Sep 2017 22:44:18 EST ID:CmGJ9czi No.45913 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>45912
Sorry for the type-os, I am posting from my phone.
>>
Fuck Wingerspear - Fri, 08 Sep 2017 11:31:37 EST ID:d4ORe5/u No.45914 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>45913
use that phone, and call a lawyer.
>>
Henry Nugglebury - Sun, 10 Sep 2017 03:50:09 EST ID:CmGJ9czi No.45916 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>45914
I have a meeting with a public defender on the fifteenth, I was just trying to become as reasonably informed about the expectations here so that I could be a better client and defendant if possible and not have to waste a lot of time in court.
>>
Esther Drushwell - Tue, 12 Sep 2017 19:21:36 EST ID:mTEKt3Rd No.45918 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>45916
You don't need to know anything to be a better client. They went to law school, you didn't. They'll advise you of your options on the 15th.

Like you said, without the facts there's no way to tell you whether it's an A or B class misdemeanor, and there's no way to advise you of the chances of diversion, because that's a contract between you and the prosecutor and varies by jurisdiction.

In my jurisdiction it's not a diversion case though.
>>
Reuben Goodspear - Tue, 12 Sep 2017 20:06:47 EST ID:BxEchvf3 No.45919 Ignore Report Quick Reply
So I don't know about your state, but in mine we have a public records database called Casenet. You can look up your current charges, past convictions, civil cases, and more. This seems to be the Tennesseean version of that. Good luck.
http://www2.tncourts.gov/PublicCaseHistory/


Cops are fucked up by Fucking Fusslepedge - Thu, 17 Aug 2017 16:03:30 EST ID:eeF1X3/S No.45898 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1503000210850.jpg -(114429B / 111.75KB, 960x540) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 114429
My buddy was driving to electric forest music festival back in June. He got pulled over. The police searched his car, they found an empty bag of coke and took it and said he'd get a ticket in the mail. They also took his girlfriends 5-htp assuming that it was molly "To get tested"

Now he gets a notice that he got a felony drug charge and was found with 25 grams of cocaine. This kid is totally fucked. He doesnt live in michigan where he was charged.

Whats gonna happen to him? He was honestly not found with any cocaine except the empty baggy, and no arrest was made. He does not live in the state of michigan where the supposed bust took place.
>>
Hedda Pickham - Tue, 05 Sep 2017 21:56:12 EST ID:vFXTPiU9 No.45910 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>45898
That's messed up
>>
Hedda Shittingstock - Tue, 05 Sep 2017 21:56:25 EST ID:MoBdd06M No.45911 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>45898
That's messed up
>>
Eugene Pomblestock - Tue, 12 Sep 2017 07:44:05 EST ID:7+bAkpmb No.45917 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>45898
That's messed up


Legal to drive without a licance? by Johnny Longdong - Sat, 02 Sep 2017 14:37:34 EST ID:kNMIPpW6 No.45904 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1504377454757.jpg -(29200B / 28.52KB, 587x390) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 29200
This age-old debate has been argued back and forth with no definitive answers. It seems courts have ruled both ways on this throughout the past.
It's written that we have a right to travel, but it's been argued that it does not specify we have the right to use a vehicle. The right to travel constitutes any other means besides a motor vehicle; walk, ride a horse, a bike, swim, canoe, whatever. However, I can't ride a horse on the highway, and many roads are far too dangerous to walk and do not provide walkways. Reasonable means of travel mandates the use of a motor vehicle in today's times, or you're breaking other laws like "obstructing traffic".

>U.S. SUPREME COURT AND OTHER HIGH COURT CITATIONS PROVING THAT NO LICENSE IS NECESSARY FOR NORMAL USE OF AN AUTOMOBILE ON COMMON WAYS

“The right of a citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, by horsedrawn carriage, wagon, or automobile, is not a mere privilege which may be permitted or prohibited at will, but a common right which he has under his right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Under this constitutional guaranty one may, therefore, under normal conditions, travel at his inclination along the public highways or in public places, and while conducting himself in an orderly and decent manner, neither interfering with nor disturbing another’s rights, he will be protected, not only in his person, but in his safe conduct.”

------------------------------------

Thompson v.Smith, 154 SE 579, 11 American Jurisprudence, Constitutional Law, section 329, page 1135 “The right of the Citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, in the ordinary course of life and business, is a common right which he has under the right to enjoy life and liberty, to acquire and possess property, and to pursue happiness and safety. It includes the right, in so doing, to use the ordinary and usual conveyances of the day, and under the existing modes of travel, includes the right to drive a horse drawn carriage or wagon thereon or to operate an automobile thereon, for the usual and ordinary purpose of life and business.” –

Thompson vs. Smith, supra.; Teche Lines vs. Danforth, Miss., 12 S.2d 784 “… the right of the citizen to drive on a public street with freedom from police interference… is a fundamental constitutional right” -White, 97 Cal.App.3d.141, 158 Cal.Rptr. 562, 566-67 (1979) “citizens have a right to drive upon the public streets of the District of Columbia or any other city absent a constitutionally sound reason for limiting their access.”

Caneisha Mills v. D.C. 2009 “The use of the automobile as a necessary adjunct to the earning of a livelihood in modern life requires us in the interest of realism to conclude that the RIGHT to use an automobile on the public highways partakes of the nature of a liberty within the meaning of the Constitutional guarantees. . .”
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>
Johnny Longdong - Sat, 02 Sep 2017 14:38:55 EST ID:kNMIPpW6 No.45905 Ignore Report Quick Reply
-City of Dayton vs. DeBrosse, 23 NE.2d 647, 650; 62 Ohio App. 232 “Thus self-driven vehicles are classified according to the use to which they are put rather than according to the means by which they are propelled” – Ex Parte Hoffert, 148 NW 20 ”

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). “…a citizen has the right to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon…” State vs. Johnson, 243 P. 1073; Cummins vs. Homes, 155 P. 171; Packard vs. Banton, 44 S.Ct. 256; Hadfield vs. Lundin, 98 Wash 516, Willis vs. Buck, 263 P. l 982;

Barney vs. Board of Railroad Commissioners, 17 P.2d 82 “The use of the highways for the purpose of travel and transportation is not a mere privilege, but a common and fundamental Right of which the public and the individual cannot be rightfully deprived.”

Chicago Motor Coach vs. Chicago, 169 NE 22; Ligare vs. Chicago, 28 NE 934; Boon vs. Clark, 214 SSW 607; 25 Am.Jur. (1st) Highways Sect.163 “the right of the Citizen to travel upon the highway and to transport his property thereon in the ordinary course of life and business… is the usual and ordinary right of the Citizen, a right common to all.” –

Ex Parte Dickey, (Dickey vs. Davis), 85 SE 781 “Every Citizen has an unalienable RIGHT to make use of the public highways of the state; every Citizen has full freedom to travel from place to place in the enjoyment of life and liberty.” People v. Nothaus, 147 Colo. 210. “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 insurances.”

Chicago Coach Co. v. City of Chicago, 337 Ill. 200, 169 N.E. 22. “Traffic infractions are not a crime.” People v. Battle “Persons faced with an unconstitutional licensing law which purports to require a license as a prerequisite to exercise of right… may ignore the law and engage with impunity in exercise of such right.”

Shuttlesworth v. Birmingham 394 U.S. 147 (1969). U.S. Supreme Court says No License Necessary To Drive Automobile On Public Highways/Streets No License Is Necessary Copy and Share Freely YHVH.name 3 “The word ‘operator’ shall not include any person who solely transports his own property and who transports no persons or property for hire or compensation.”
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>
Clara Claybanks - Sat, 02 Sep 2017 14:47:27 EST ID:kNMIPpW6 No.45906 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Kent vs. Dulles see Vestal, Freedom of Movement, 41 Iowa L.Rev. 6, 13—14. “The validity of restrictions on the freedom of movement of particular individuals, both substantively and procedurally, is precisely the sort of matter that is the peculiar domain of the courts.” Comment, 61 Yale L.J. at page 187. “a person detained for an investigatory stop can be questioned but is “not obliged to answer, answers may not be compelled, and refusal to answer furnishes no basis for an arrest.”Justice White, Hiibel “Automobiles have the right to use the highways of the State on an equal footing with other vehicles.”

Cumberland Telephone. & Telegraph Co. v Yeiser 141 Kentucy 15. “Each citizen has the absolute right to choose for himself the mode of conveyance he desires, whether it be by wagon or carriage, by horse, motor or electric car, or by bicycle, or astride of a horse, subject to the sole condition that he will observe all those requirements that are known as the law of the road.”

Swift v City of Topeka, 43 U.S. Supreme Court says No License Necessary To Drive Automobile On Public Highways/Streets No License Is Necessary Copy and Share Freely YHVH.name 4 Kansas 671, 674. The Supreme Court said in U.S. v Mersky (1960) 361 U.S. 431: An administrative regulation, of course, is not a “statute.” A traveler on foot has the same right to use of the public highway as an automobile or any other vehicle.

Cecchi v. Lindsay, 75 Atl. 376, 377, 1 Boyce (Del.) 185. Automotive vehicles are lawful means of conveyance and have equal rights upon the streets with horses and carriages.

Chicago Coach Co. v. City of Chicago, 337 Ill. 200, 205; See also: Christy v. Elliot, 216 Ill. 31; Ward v. Meredith, 202 Ill. 66; Shinkle v. McCullough, 116 Ky. 960; Butler v. Cabe, 116 Ark. 26, 28-29. …automobiles are lawful vehicles and have equal rights on the highways with horses and carriages. Daily v. Maxwell, 133 S.W. 351, 354.

Matson v. Dawson, 178 N.W. 2d 588, 591. A farmer has the same right to the use of the highways of the state, whether on foot or in a motor vehicle, as any other citizen.

Draffin v. Massey, 92 S.E.2d 38, 42. Persons may lawfully ride in automobiles, as they may lawfully ride on bicycles. Doherty v. Ayer, 83 N.E. 677, 197 Mass. 241, 246;

Molway v. City of Chicago, 88 N.E. 485, 486, 239 Ill. 486; Smiley v. East St. Louis Ry. Co., 100 N.E. 157, 158. “A soldier’s personal automobile is part of his ‘household goods[.]’
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>
Martha Claybanks - Sun, 03 Sep 2017 14:57:56 EST ID:DeUulLMn No.45907 Ignore Report Quick Reply
It's not a debate. If you're going to travel by car on public roads you have to have a license. Bullshit sovereign citizen arguments just get you thrown in jail for pissing off the court.
>>
Nicholas Noshwater - Tue, 05 Sep 2017 10:23:36 EST ID:b0OjQMtf No.45908 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Actually, I am genuinely curious why people think that there's some magic out there that if you just ~get woke breh~ certain laws don't apply to you.

Do people think that lawyers are playing by rules that don't exist for shits an giggles and if they go to court an start rambling off nonsense they read on the internet the court is just going to go "oh he got you on this one counselor, case dismissed!"

seriously.
>>
Wesley Bunway - Tue, 05 Sep 2017 10:45:36 EST ID:U2UDYvRA No.45909 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>45908
Well I think you sort of answered your own question, pseudolaw is an offspring of magical thinking. The law as practiced is recondite enough and contains enough stereotyped ritual that it provides the foundation for a parallel body of cargo-cult praxis — pseudolawyers offer all kinds of seals, incantations, and rituals that are supposed to protect you from legal consequence.


To use or not to sue? by Edward Channingwater - Sun, 09 Jul 2017 17:10:58 EST ID:GY2kVhwY No.45883 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1499634658818.jpg -(741786B / 724.40KB, 2560x1440) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 741786
A few weeks ago a co-worker of mine (I am a supervisor) got into a yelling match with me over me asking him to do something he didn't want to do. He did not directly threaten me verbally at this point, but he is twice my size and was attempting to intimidate me; including him coming up close to me and asking "You wanna say something to me?" In a threatening tone. I contacted our director, and the other supervisor, to alert them to this. The other supervisor comes in because they live close and I was very much under the impression I was not safe at work. The co-worker that threatened me returned; thinking I was out of the office, he began to brag about how he was about to come back in and attack me.
At this, I ask him to leave for the day and all hell breaks loose. He and the other supervisor start screaming at one another, as myself and other had to hold the two back from one another or there would have been a fight. Finally he leaves the office, and having heard what happened, our director comes in to speak with him. Our director leaves, the asshole who threatened me got to work the rest of the shift. I was promised that the situation would be resolved and I was more than happy to be patient. Weeks have passed and literally nothing has been done, even the bare minimum that the director promised.
Now when have HR coming in tomorrow with an eye to fire all three of us involved. I'm at my ropes end with this company, and I've been told by a few people that if I'm fired that I'd be in my right to sue them. Is there any truth to that?
>>
Nathaniel Faffingbet - Fri, 11 Aug 2017 09:16:25 EST ID:QyjdDUnF No.45894 Ignore Report Quick Reply
You should not sue. You should forgive him. If you don't like your job, resign and find a new one. Or find a new job, then resign. But really, forgive the guy.
>>
Fuck Surrytere - Wed, 16 Aug 2017 18:44:36 EST ID:9EEU97MP No.45896 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Actually pulling the trigger on a suit is down the line, still. Right now, you should prepare a suit, and familiarize yourself with what that would entail, as well as the rights that are due to you.

Even if you don't feel right doing it, you need to put yourself onto the best position that you can. This guy from corporate, he doesn't k ow you at all, and won't have the slightest problem rolling over you. It's his job to do that, in fact. The only obstacle to that, will be the ones that you put up.
>>
Charles Subbleshaw - Wed, 23 Aug 2017 12:52:02 EST ID:0wqc77Ud No.45902 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>45894
what the actual fuck this post pissed me off so much I just had to type about it


<<Last Pages Next>>
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
Report Post
Reason
Note
Please be descriptive with report notes,
this helps staff resolve issues quicker.