ADVrider

Go Back   ADVrider > Riding > The perfect line and other riding myths
User Name
Password
Register Inmates Photos Site Rules Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 10-17-2013, 02:17 PM   #76
MotoTex
Miles of Smiles
 
MotoTex's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2009
Location: Tool Shed
Oddometer: 1,599
Quote:
Originally Posted by bv11 View Post
521.001 6(b) means the state can still suspend or revoke someone who doesn't have a driver's license. All states have something similar.
I agree that all states have something similar. They must have.

I disagree that when a sentence reads:

"License" means an authorization to operate a motor vehicle that is issued under or granted by the laws of this state. The term includes:

(A) a driver's license;


(B) the privilege of a person to operate a motor vehicle regardless of whether the person holds a driver's license; and


(C) a nonresident's operating privilege.




Short form:

"License" (for this chapter) means authorization ... issued under or granted by the state and it includes the privilege of a person to operate a motor vehicle regardless of whether that person holds a driver's license. It also includes a driver's license (as defined for this chapter) and a nonresident's operating privilege.


Maybe reading it this way clarifies that it has nothing to do with what you suggested. There doesn't seem to be anything regarding suspension or revocation in this chapter except in reference to those who have applied for and received a Texas driver license.

It is an issue of contract. The application is a contract. Once under contract the rules stipulated for holding the driver license apply to that person. Those who have not entered into this contract are not bound by those rules.

What would be revoked or suspended with a driver who holds no license?

Thank you for a great example of trying to bend a very straight-forward definition to fit what you would like to continue to believe.

I went through the same phases of denial at the beginning. After reading more on court decisions, better understanding contract law and the basis of our legal system (common law), learning the fine points about how writing legal stuff differs from regular conversation, and purchasing a couple of law dictionaries as references, I've come to understand why it is written this way.

Without this rather well hidden gem the entire chapter may not pass the test of constitutionality.

Just to be clear, I have no illusion that this is a conspiracy. It is merely momentum of one bad choice followed by another.

My best guess is that back in the day the state wrote laws to regulate commercial use of the roads and required licensing for commercial drivers. Pretty soon some schmuck who wasn't a commercial driver wanted to have a license to inflate his ego. Then another, and another, hounding their representatives until someone made it possible so that those who are not required to have a license, could have a license. That is the most logical chain of events I can fathom which would lead to this. Now, after generations of this foolishness it is accepted as if it were required by all.

A license clearly isn't required for non-commercial operation, and there is a very good reason why it isn't. Only those who have taken the time to learn why can connect the dots. They don't teach this stuff in school any more, and the attorneys and other officials who rake in the dough over this aren't about to see it any other way. But, the fact remains that this is what is written, and, they cannot change this or it will fail in court.
__________________

This is The Internet. Confirm for yourself anything you may see while visiting this strange and uncertain land.


MotoTex screwed with this post 10-17-2013 at 02:47 PM
MotoTex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2013, 02:36 PM   #77
windmill
Beastly Adventurer
 
windmill's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2008
Location: Kent, Washington State
Oddometer: 4,084
Quote:
Originally Posted by MotoTex View Post
Without this rather well hidden gem the entire chapter would not pass the test of constitutionality.
Why?

The government has the right to control use of public assets.
__________________
"Take care, sir," cried Sancho. "Those over there are not giants but windmills".
windmill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2013, 02:52 PM   #78
bv11
Gnarly Adventurer
 
Joined: Nov 2011
Location: Midwest
Oddometer: 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by MotoTex View Post
I agree that all states have something similar. They must have.

I disagree that when a sentence reads:

"License" means an authorization to operate a motor vehicle that is issued under or granted by the laws of this state. The term includes:

(A) a driver's license;


(B) the privilege of a person to operate a motor vehicle regardless of whether the person holds a driver's license; and


(C) a nonresident's operating privilege.




Short form:

"License" (for this chapter) means authorization ... issued under or granted by the state and it includes the privilege of a person to operate a motor vehicle regardless of whether that person holds a driver's license. It also includes a driver's license (as defined for this chapter) and a nonresident's operating privilege.


Maybe reading it this way clarifies that it has nothing to do with what you suggested. There doesn't seem to be anything regarding suspension or revocation in this chapter except in reference to those who have applied for and received a Texas driver license.

It is an issue of contract. The application is a contract. Once under contract the rules stipulated for holding the driver license apply to that person. Those who have not entered into this contract are not bound by those rules.

What would be revoked or suspended with a driver who holds no license?

Thank you for a great example of trying to bend a very straight-forward definition to fit what you would like to continue to believe.

I went through the same phases of denial at the beginning. After reading more on court decisions, better understanding contract law and the basis of our legal system (common law), learning the fine points about how writing legal stuff differs from regular conversation, and purchasing a couple of law dictionaries as references, I've come to understand why it is written this way.

Without this rather well hidden gem the entire chapter may not pass the test of constitutionality.

Just to be clear, I have no illusion that this is a conspiracy. It is merely momentum of one bad choice followed by another.

My best guess is that back in the day the state wrote laws to regulate commercial use of the roads and required licensing for commercial drivers. Pretty soon some schmuck who wasn't a commercial driver wanted to have a license to inflate his ego. Then another, and another, hounding their representatives until someone made it possible for those who are not required to have a license, could have a license. That is the most logical chain of events I can fathom which would lead to this. Now, after generations of this foolishness it is accepted as if it were required by all.

A license clearly isn't required for non-commercial operation, and there is a very good reason why it isn't. Only those who have taken the time to learn why can connect the dots. They don't teach this stuff in school any more, and the attorneys and other officials who rake in the dough over this aren't about to see it any other way. But, the fact remains that this is what is written, and, they cannot change this or it will fail in court.
Believe what you want, but it is there only to give the state the authority to suspend or revoke the "license" of someone who doesn't actually have a drivers license.
bv11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2013, 03:05 PM   #79
MotoTex
Miles of Smiles
 
MotoTex's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2009
Location: Tool Shed
Oddometer: 1,599
Quote:
Originally Posted by windmill View Post
Why?
The government has the right to control use of public assets.
Do you have a reference to substantiate this claim?

Unless you consider people and their liberty as "public assets" I can't quite understand your statement.

As to the whys and wherefores;

The state has the right to regulate commerce.

They have an obligation to maintain the public roadways, because the people voted to collect taxes on fuel sales for that purpose.

No state shall pass any law impairing the obligation to contract. (meaning that people can contract aspects of their liberty and freedom away if they choose to. DL, SSN, Military enlistment, public office, etc.)

No state shall pass any law that impairs the rights reserved by the people. (life, liberty, property, guns, secure from unlawful searches and seizures, that sort of thing)

Some of these concepts are from that troublesome document those old fogies wrote back in the late 1700s. Probably not applicable any more.

Might be worth a read though, just to come up to speed.
__________________

This is The Internet. Confirm for yourself anything you may see while visiting this strange and uncertain land.

MotoTex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2013, 03:08 PM   #80
MotoTex
Miles of Smiles
 
MotoTex's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2009
Location: Tool Shed
Oddometer: 1,599
Quote:
Originally Posted by bv11 View Post
Believe what you want, but it is there only to give the state the authority to suspend or revoke the "license" of someone who doesn't actually have a drivers license.
Please. Show me the statute that indicates what you describe as a punishable offense.

I've looked, and have asked others who should know to show me. So far we don't have a winner.

Maybe you can succeed where I and they have failed.

I'm rooting for you. Let's see what you've got to show.

As you say, "Believe what you want." I prefer to see the proof.
__________________

This is The Internet. Confirm for yourself anything you may see while visiting this strange and uncertain land.


MotoTex screwed with this post 10-17-2013 at 03:21 PM
MotoTex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2013, 04:08 PM   #81
joexr
Beastly Adventurer
 
Joined: Jan 2011
Location: S.E.
Oddometer: 3,773
Quote:
Originally Posted by LilGreenBooger View Post
I pay taxes too. I'm 30 years old, never a ticket, never an accident, never been pulled over. How are they going to fine my ass off and take my license if I OBEY THE LAW?





oh right, the lawbreakers aren't the problem, it's the law/police/courts that's the problem. Give me a break.
You ride a goddam KLR. The only law you CAN break is littering when you park it.
joexr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2013, 04:20 PM   #82
joexr
Beastly Adventurer
 
Joined: Jan 2011
Location: S.E.
Oddometer: 3,773
Pissed

Quote:
Originally Posted by windmill View Post
Why?

The government has the right to control use of public assets.
WE ARE the public , the assets are ALL of ours. The government is supposed to be US. Public assets certainly aren't theirs.
joexr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2013, 04:58 PM   #83
MotoTex
Miles of Smiles
 
MotoTex's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2009
Location: Tool Shed
Oddometer: 1,599
Quote:
Originally Posted by joexr View Post
WE ARE the public , the assets are ALL of ours. The government is supposed to be US. Public assets certainly aren't theirs.
It pains me to no end, but, I wholeheartedly agree with you.

This time.
__________________

This is The Internet. Confirm for yourself anything you may see while visiting this strange and uncertain land.

MotoTex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2013, 05:33 PM   #84
joexr
Beastly Adventurer
 
Joined: Jan 2011
Location: S.E.
Oddometer: 3,773
Quote:
Originally Posted by MotoTex View Post
It pains me to no end, but, I wholeheartedly agree with you.

This time.
And I think you make sense every now and then too. Mostly today.
joexr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2013, 05:57 PM   #85
windmill
Beastly Adventurer
 
windmill's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2008
Location: Kent, Washington State
Oddometer: 4,084
Quote:
Originally Posted by joexr View Post
WE ARE the public , the assets are ALL of ours. The government is supposed to be US. Public assets certainly aren't theirs.
No, public assets are the peoples collectively, administered by our elected officials and who they appoint.

The simple fact that something is public property, doesn't guarantee that it may be used or accessed individually, be it a piece of asphalt or military hardware.
__________________
"Take care, sir," cried Sancho. "Those over there are not giants but windmills".
windmill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2013, 06:06 PM   #86
joexr
Beastly Adventurer
 
Joined: Jan 2011
Location: S.E.
Oddometer: 3,773
Quote:
Originally Posted by windmill View Post
No, public assets are the peoples collectively, administered by our elected officials and who they appoint.

The simple fact that something is public property, doesn't guarantee that it may be used or accessed individually, be it a piece of asphalt or military hardware.
Military hardware I can understand , but you're merely making excuses for our bureauocratic government.
joexr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2013, 06:26 PM   #87
bv11
Gnarly Adventurer
 
Joined: Nov 2011
Location: Midwest
Oddometer: 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by MotoTex View Post
Please. Show me the statute that indicates what you describe as a punishable offense.

I've looked, and have asked others who should know to show me. So far we don't have a winner.

Maybe you can succeed where I and they have failed.

I'm rooting for you. Let's see what you've got to show.

As you say, "Believe what you want." I prefer to see the proof.
Your use of the term "contracts" regarding this issue and the alternate meanings of simple words is right out of the sovereign citizen handbook. You made reference in another post referring to their agenda as "that crap", so it seems strange to me you are in tune with their views on this issue.

The verbiage used in the statutes is very simple non-legalese language and means nothing more or less than it says.

These are the applicable definitions

Quote:
(3) "Driver's license" means an authorization issued by the department for the operation of a motor vehicle. The term includes:
(A) a temporary license or instruction permit; and
(B) an occupational license.

(6) "License" means an authorization to operate a motor vehicle that is issued under or granted by the laws of this state. The term includes:
(A) a driver's license;
(B) the privilege of a person to operate a motor vehicle regardless of whether the person holds a driver's license; and
(C) a nonresident's operating privilege.
These two definitions cover anyone issued a regular Texas driver's license, a temporary, instructional, or occupational license (which is referred to as a hardship license in most other states), anyone who is not licensed, and anyone granted authorization to drive because they are a non-resident and have a driver's license from their home state. In short, anyone and everyone who might be found driving a vehicle.


These statutes require a driver's license to operate a motor vehicle on a highway, require the license to be exhibited on demand, and provide the penalty for failure to do so.

Quote:
Sec. 521.021. LICENSE REQUIRED. A person, other than a person expressly exempted under this chapter, may not operate a motor vehicle on a highway in this state unless the person holds a driver's license issued under this chapter.

Sec. 521.025. LICENSE TO BE CARRIED AND EXHIBITED ON DEMAND; CRIMINAL PENALTY. (a) A person required to hold a license under Section 521.021 shall:
(1) have in the person's possession while operating a motor vehicle the class of driver's license appropriate for the type of vehicle operated; and
(2) display the license on the demand of a magistrate, court officer, or peace officer.
(b) A peace officer may stop and detain a person operating a motor vehicle to determine if the person has a driver's license as required by this section.
(c) A person who violates this section commits an offense. An offense under this subsection is a misdemeanor punishable by a fine not to exceed $200, except that:
(1) for a second conviction within one year after the date of the first conviction, the offense is a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of not less than $25 or more than $200;
(2) for a third or subsequent conviction within one year after the date of the second conviction the offense is a misdemeanor punishable by:
(A) a fine of not less than $25 or more than $500;
(B) confinement in the county jail for not less than 72 hours or more than six months; or
(C) both the fine and confinement; and
(3) if it is shown on the trial of the offense that at the time of the offense the person was operating the motor vehicle in violation of Section 601.191 and caused or was at fault in a motor vehicle accident that resulted in serious bodily injury to or the death of another person, an offense under this section is a Class A misdemeanor.
(d) It is a defense to prosecution under this section if the person charged produces in court a driver's license:
(1) issued to that person;
(2) appropriate for the type of vehicle operated; and
(3) valid at the time of the arrest for the offense.
(e) The judge of each court shall report promptly to the department each conviction obtained in the court under this section.
(f) The court may assess a defendant an administrative fee not to exceed $10 if a charge under this section is dismissed because of the defense listed under Subsection (d).
These are the only Texas residents exempted from the requirement to hold a Texas driver's license when operating a motor vehicle.

Quote:
Sec. 521.027. PERSONS EXEMPT FROM LICENSE REQUIREMENT. The following persons are exempt from the license requirement imposed under this chapter:
(1) a person in the service of the state military forces or the United States while the person is operating an official motor vehicle in the scope of that service;
(2) a person while the person is operating a road machine, farm tractor, or implement of husbandry on a highway, unless the vehicle is a commercial motor vehicle under Section 522.003;
(3) a nonresident on active duty in the armed forces of the United States who holds a license issued by the person's state or Canadian province of residence; and
(4) a person who is the spouse or dependent child of a nonresident exempt under Subdivision (3) and who holds a license issued by the person's state or Canadian province of residence.
Anyone other than those listed in Sections 1 or 2 above are clearly required to have, and exhibit on demand, a driver's license appropriate for the vehicle they are operating. The penalties for failure to comply are clearly spelled out.

It is all spelled out in plain language. Whether or not you choose to believe the words mean something other than what they do is up to you. Either way, I wish you well and I'm done with this.
bv11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2013, 07:01 PM   #88
Bald Kirk
Dances with Dirt Bikes
 
Bald Kirk's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2007
Location: Aloha
Oddometer: 792
I found some of the footage:




__________________
Kawasaki Lover
Bald Kirk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2013, 07:15 PM   #89
windmill
Beastly Adventurer
 
windmill's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2008
Location: Kent, Washington State
Oddometer: 4,084
Quote:
Originally Posted by joexr View Post
Military hardware I can understand , but you're merely making excuses for our bureauocratic government.
I'm not looking to be told what to do, and I'm not trying to create government jobs, but I do prefer that our assets and well being are protected from the needless abuse of selfish, thoughtless, and ignorant people.
__________________
"Take care, sir," cried Sancho. "Those over there are not giants but windmills".
windmill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2013, 07:26 PM   #90
joexr
Beastly Adventurer
 
Joined: Jan 2011
Location: S.E.
Oddometer: 3,773
Wicked

Quote:
Originally Posted by windmill View Post
I'm not looking to be told what to do, and I'm not trying to create government jobs, but I do prefer that our assets and well being are protected from the needless abuse of selfish, thoughtless, and ignorant people.
In a way YOU'RE being selfish , thoughtless and ignorant. We're BOTH right to some extent.
joexr is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Share

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

.
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


Times are GMT -7.   It's 12:01 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ADVrider 2011-2014