RSS Feed

Subscribe to The Freedom Articles RSS (Really Simple Syndication) feeds and stay up to date with the latest news.

How to Drive Without a License


Learn the truth about how to drive without a license. You have a fundamental and inherent right to travel, just as you have the right to breathe or eat.

How to drive without a license

is an aspect of sovereignty that many people want to learn. Can you legally drive without a license? What is the difference between driving and traveling? Is driving a right or a privilege? What do you say to the policeman if you are stopped? How can you best handle unconstitutional checkpoints? These are all important questions which we will explore here; if you want to know how to drive without a license, you’ll need to thoroughly master the concepts behind them.

Can you Legally Drive Without a License?

In short, yes – but technically you are traveling not driving (see below). However, just because you have a right to do something (in this case the right to travel), it does not mean you’ll never be hassled, intimidated, charged or even temporarily thrown in prison. Rights must be constantly asserted and defended, especially in the face of a growing police state such as the one in which we are now living. That means you need to be prepared to defend yourself. It’s not for everyone, but such is price paid by those who defend liberty and know how to drive without a license successfully.


How to drive without a license depends on how well you know and assert your rights.

What is the Difference between Driving and Traveling?

This might appear to be semantics or splitting hairs, but it’s not. The whole issue of how to drive without a license boils down to this. In everyday common English, to travel by means of a car, and to drive, are identical. However, one of the biggest cons of the Law Society is the fact that they have their own language (legalese) which appears to be English but which has different definitions for some key terms. In this case, as defined by legalese, “to drive” is to go on the roads by a motorized conveyance doing business or being engaged in commerce, and it is a privilege. “To travel”, on the other hand, is a right, and no legislation can be passed to strip you of your fundamental, inherent rights.

To state you are “driving” is to unwittingly place yourself in admiralty or commercial jurisdiction.

As a sovereign being, you never need to surrender your rights and exchange them for privileges. This is the way societies descend into tyranny. To exchange a right for a privilege is to ask permission for something (in the form of a governmental permit or license) that you are free to do anyway.

Is Driving a Right or a Privilege?

Driving is a privilege; traveling is a right. A privilege is granted by some authority, and equally it can be taken away by some authority. A right can never be abrogated. Our right to travel can never be stripped from us; it is as fundamental to our existence as our right to breathe.


There is a lot of case law supporting the right to travel. The quotes below are just a tiny fraction of it.

What is the Case Law Supporting the Right to Travel?

Judges have been ruling on this case for literally over 100 years in various levels of Courts. Retired policeman Jack McLamb wrote a great article citing some of the case law:

CASE #1: “The use of the highway for the purpose of travel and transportation is not a mere privilege, but a common fundamental right of which the public and individuals cannot rightfully be deprived.” Chicago Motor Coach v. Chicago, 169 NE 221.

CASE #2: “The right of the citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, either by carriage or by automobile, is not a mere privilege which a city may prohibit or permit at will, but a common law right which he has under the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” Thompson v. Smith, 154 SE 579.

CASE #3: “The right to travel is a part of the liberty of which the citizen cannot be deprived without due process of law under the Fifth Amendment.” Kent v. Dulles, 357 US 116, 125.

CASE #4: “The right to travel is a well-established common right that does not owe its existence to the federal government. It is recognized by the courts as a natural right.” Schactman v. Dulles 96 App DC 287, 225 F2d 938, at 941.

For further information including case law on how to drive without a license, I suggest reading the magnificent sovereignty guide by Johnny Liberty “The Global Sovereign’s Handbook” and watching this in-depth InfoWars video. The DVD I Don’t Drive, I Travel is also very useful, inspiring and features people who know from firsthand experience about how to drive without a license successfully.

What Do You Say to the Policeman if You are Stopped?

The best way to handle peace officers, law enforcements officers or policemen is as sovereign, freeman-on-the-land Dean Clifford does in the video above. Politely and courteously state your rights; know the law and quote cases if need be; display the confidence that you know how to drive without a license, and that it is perfectly lawful; refuse to be intimidated; and most of all, be prepared to have a long conversation with the initial person’s superiors. Most cops are completely unaware that they are enforcing commercial statutes in admiralty jurisdiction, and that you can exercise your right to remain in common law jurisdiction. If you are traveling privately and not engaged in business on the roads, you do not need a license.


You’d be surprised how many police officers know about the right to travel, and will honor it if you confidently assert your rights.

How Can I Best Handle Unconstitutional Checkpoints?

This compilation “How to Refuse Unconstitutional Checkpoints” features some great firsthand examples. Ask the law enforcement officer if they are detaining you (“Are you detaining me or am I free to go?”); if they say they are detaining you, state that they only have 2 legal reasons for doing so: your consent or reasonable suspicion based on probable cause. State that they do not have your consent, so therefore they must produce probable cause, else they are illegally detaining you. Ask them for evidence of probable cause; if they have none, ask them again, politely but repeatedly, if you are free to go.

If you have more questions about how to drive without a license, you can call Tools For Freedom at 800-770-8802 x4 and we’ll be happy to assist and offer alternative road travel solutions.


Want to keep informed on the latest and greatest news and analysis on the New World Order, Natural Health, Sovereignty and more? Sign up for free blog updates!

Makia Freeman is the editor of The Freedom Articles and senior researcher at, writing on many aspects of truth and freedom, from exposing aspects of the global conspiracy to suggesting solutions for how humanity can create a new system of peace and abundance.



Share This Post

Posted by on August 7, 2013. Filed under Breaking News,Sovereignty. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

105 Responses to How to Drive Without a License

  1. Rod Souza Reply

    May 21, 2014 at 6:39 pm

    Please help support our campaign to spread the truth with real evidence and proof concerning this paramount issue of “Driving vs Traveling”

    View our video and sign our petition if you agree and share with everyone you know. The time has come to stop the policing for profit on our highways OPEN by a matter of RIGHT to the traveling public.

    Thank you

  2. Theodore Reavis Reply

    January 1, 2015 at 1:17 am

    Is this in all states right to travel without a license? I showed the police Sgt laws about it. My car was impounded due to my expired tags. I told him that’s state law not federal. The roads are public; I am not in commerce, only going to work and business. He told me he was enforcing VA state law. I’m told him the US Supreme Court see it differently and he refused to follow federal law so my rights were deprived.

    • Makia Freeman Reply

      January 6, 2015 at 10:21 pm

      Cops are generally not taught this thing, so it can be difficult to get them to understand. However, US courts have consistently upheld the right to travel, e.g.

      • Kimberly Reply

        August 29, 2015 at 9:27 pm

        I would like information on the right to travel in the state of Oregon I had a great driving record 25 years no tickets then bought a car that the sell was a scam lost my license because I drove it anyway after having trouble and unable to tag it therefore I didnt insure it the tickets were horrendous and I have never gotten nor do I want a state license again I just got pulled over again bought a car a couple months ago tags just expired so a ton more tickets. Do I have to have insurance and tags is there any thing on this that protects us from state fines. Thank you for your time. Kimberly

    • Jason McKinney Reply

      August 22, 2015 at 9:26 pm

      Your tags are a registration issue. Not a driver’s license issue. So they are not the same thing.

      • aj weatherd Reply

        November 13, 2015 at 6:25 pm

        but if you register the vehicle isnt this acceptance of the commerce law?????? in order to travel freely you must NOT being conducting buisness or driving by defintion (legalese). no license equates to no registered automobile tags or otherwise. Once you register your vehicle it is commerce and inspection plus license for operator is lawful

        • Makia Freeman Reply

          November 17, 2015 at 1:04 am

          I see what you are saying – however there is the question of capacity. It’s all about what you were doing at the actual time of the alleged infraction. They will PRESUME you were driving. However, a presumption of law is never as solid as a fact of law, and can be rebutted. Ask them to prove their claim/presumption.

    • collin Reply

      November 20, 2015 at 1:22 am

      in a situation like this would it be possible to sue the police department for violating your rights?

  3. Patrick Reply

    February 7, 2015 at 5:41 pm

    Hey great article , very informative . Would you happen to know if these methods are applicable where I live? (Australia)

    • Makia Freeman Reply

      February 12, 2015 at 11:21 pm

      I have not had personal experience applying these principles in Australia, but I see no reason why they wouldn’t apply everywhere – at least in Western countries. They certainly work in Canada and the US. Humans are born with inherent, unalienable natural rights, no matter what Government says or what it codifies in its laws.

      I would appeal to cops/judges/bureaucrats at that deeper level, whenever communicating with them. Ask them to disprove that you have a right to travel in writing, etc. or else you will assume that it does exist. Usually they leave people alone who claim this right because they fear the publicity.

  4. Anthony Rodriguez Reply

    March 6, 2015 at 11:04 am

    I’m from a small town called Slaton, Texas. There is an officer here that repeatedly pulls me over for no license. All I do is go from home to work and back. He pulls me over everyday cause he says “I know u don’t have a license.” I think it’s harassment. He impounds my car every stop. Would what you are saying help me in any way?

    • Makia Freeman Reply

      March 12, 2015 at 2:50 am

      Absolutely! I suggest the following:

      – Tell the cop you are traveling in a private capacity, and that courts all the way to the Supreme Court have upheld the inherent right to travel
      – Go to this site (, print it out and have it with you next tome you get stopped
      – Get the cop’s name and badge number. Tell him he is personally responsible for his actions and that he will be personally liable if you bring action against him for harassment and other charges

  5. shannon Reply

    March 18, 2015 at 1:52 pm

    So how do I void my current drivers license? Is it as simple as letting it expire?

    • Makia Freeman Reply

      March 19, 2015 at 12:58 am

      Yes, you can let it expire, or you can go to your local DMV (or whatever department/agency handles licensing) and revoke or cancel the contract with them.

  6. Eli Hobbes Reply

    April 23, 2015 at 3:38 am

    I think this concept is goofy. I’ve seen referenced court case that somehow are not hyperlinked. That is the first thing I notice in these pages of this type of site that is fishy.

    Next, each of these sites, this one included, makes a statement that the term “driver” has a legal definition of a person who is engaged in a work process. Yet they provide no case law reference that such a definition is factual in any jurisdiction.

    Clearly I should research it a little bit further if it means that much to me. At this point I just think I am looking at a bunch of junk science style legal “opinions” of uncredentialed people who shouldn’t be providing legal advise.

    • Makia Freeman Reply

      April 23, 2015 at 8:03 pm

      I have personally experienced on my own, and helped many others, escape speeding fines, parking fines and “driving without a license” citations by using the information in this article as a basis. Judges and prosecutors rushed to dismiss the case. I know it works from experience. I’ve seen it time and time again. However, I understand your desire for more “proof” and have updated the article to include more case law and sources.

  7. isaiah Reply

    April 28, 2015 at 3:24 pm

    I was wondering,so I am 16 years old can I drive without a license or do I have to be 18 to have this right?

    • Makia Freeman Reply

      April 28, 2015 at 9:14 pm

      Good question. I see no reason why children and teenagers don’t have the same rights as adults; however, with a right comes the responsibility to use it and exercise it appropriately. Driving or operating a car or motor vehicle has serious consequences (such as accidentally killing others) if not done with care, precision and responsibility. Therefore, I would suggest you drive with adults for a long time until you have 3 independent adults who can attest to the fact that you can operate a vehicle safely.
      That being said, there’s no reason not to get a drivers’ license. It’s a rite of passage and a good way to test yourself, to ensure you are truly safe. Then, once you have it, you can revoke it; or you can keep it and “travel” instead of “drive”. The point is not so much whether you have a drivers’ license; the point is what jurisdiction/capacity you were in at the time you are stopped by a cop. They will PRESUME you are in commercial jurisdiction and driving, but this is a PRESUMPTION of LAW, not a FACT of LAW. You can assert that you are in common law jurisdiction and traveling, regardless of whether you happen to own a license or not. It’s all about which capacity you are acting in.

  8. val oleary Reply

    May 2, 2015 at 10:03 am

    Can they still fine you for no license?

    • Makia Freeman Reply

      May 4, 2015 at 9:24 pm

      They can try … but if you know how to defend yourself, no citation will be ably to stick to you, because to cite you for an alleged infraction, implies you have already agreed (through a contract like the State-issued drivers’ license) to follow all of their rules and regulations – which are commercial/corporate in nature. When you travel by right (instead of driving by privilege), you are not in the jurisdiction where you are bound by those regulations. has lots of great info on this in the sovereignty section. It’s well worth educating yourself.

  9. carmen Reply

    May 17, 2015 at 3:37 am

    Love the informative article. I am interested in reading more cases that are similar in nature.

  10. Josh Reply

    May 29, 2015 at 7:41 pm

    It’s amazing how many people were brainwashed into believing that driving is a privilege. The roads are paid for by the people, maintained by the people, and created by the people. Automobiles were paid for and built by the people. Therefore, the roads and vehicle’s belong to the people. Where in there does the government have to ability to just swoop in and say you need to ask them permission to drive on your roads that you built. The government cannot own anything, everything is the people’s. Making driving a privilege was just a way for government to monopolize the road ways and make it a cash cow for extorting money from citizens. If driving wasn’t a privilege they couldn’t put up roadblocks, tollways, have drivers license fees, registration fees, city sticker fees, license plate renewal fees,….etc. And let’s not forgot about all the tickets fines and lawyer fees that go along with all that in the courts. People need to stand up and say enough is enough. The constitution was created to limit power of the government because they knew governments always begin to become tyrannical at some point

    • Jason McKinney Reply

      August 22, 2015 at 9:32 pm

      Ahh but here is the crux Josh. DRIVING is a privlige. TRAVELLING is a right. when stopped by the police you must instist that you are traveling and not driving. DRIVING is the act of operating a motor vehichle for the purpose of commerce or business and THAT does require a license.

  11. Isaac Reply

    June 1, 2015 at 4:00 am

    Hey there I read this and I was wondering I got a dui and they took my license away in Washington and I was wondering what would be the best way to tell the police officers I’m going to work??

    • Makia Freeman Reply

      June 10, 2015 at 10:20 pm

      I suggest printing out the case law contained in the article, keeping it in your glovebox and quoting it to any police officers when they try to claim you are “driving” instead of traveling.

  12. mike Reply

    June 11, 2015 at 9:38 am

    How would this concept be able to apply to the registration and inspection of your vehicle, as well as being forced to have insurance? Does it mean that their requirement is voided as well?

    • Makia Freeman Reply

      June 29, 2015 at 9:38 pm

      Good question. I have heard of cases of some people successfully refusing to register and insure their vehicle, although with registration, you would be driving around with no plates, and you’re an easy target for cops. It would be very difficult to have them accept that. However, ultimately the issue of registration/insurance is a different issue to that of driving/traveling, because it’s all about capacity. You can drive or travel with the same vehicle and do each one at different times.

      There are some who claim that registration inherently means signing over ownership of the item (e.g. vehicle) to the entity that is registering it, however Dean Clifford disputes that. I am still researching the truth of that and have not gotten to the bottom of it.

      • Hugh Mann Reply

        October 8, 2015 at 3:05 am

        I’ve been looking into this quite a bit lately and reading a lot about people who have gotten pulled over with expired plates, licenses, and lapsed insurance, and are now asking how to get out of the tickets.
        I think the main problem is that once you have any of these things, it is proof positive you are a driver.
        From what I’ve been reading, and what I’ll be practicing as soon as my certificate of origin comes for my motorcycle is this; do not provide evidence to the police. You have not committed a crime.
        Although you may think of an officer as a “public servant”, their job from the first moment of encounter with you is to build a case against you. They will examine you, interrogate you, and if you are cooperative, will get a confession from you without ever having to lift a finger.
        When you get pulled over, you cannot say you were “just driving to work because I have to feed my kids” or “the insurance just expired two days ago”. You should be saying nothing but;
        * “Am I being detained, or am I free to go?”
        * If you are being detained – “I am exercising my 5th amendment right under the Constitution and will not be answering any questions and I am exercising my 4th amendment right under the Constitution and do not consent to a search of my person or belongings.”
        There are many people who are being arrested for having false identification, forged documents, and other things to make them look legitimate, but they are just providing ammunition against themselves. Give them nothing. No plates, no insurance card, no passport, no credit cards, no last name.
        You’re attempting to convince them you are not part of the establishment, but supplying evidence to the contrary.

        • Makia Freeman Reply

          October 8, 2015 at 3:24 am

          Thanks for your comment. I have heard of some people having success with getting the “certificate of origin” for their vehicle. Your approach is certainly one of many possible sovereign/free man approaches. It doesn’t suit everyone, but I admire your bravery and commitment to the principle of the matter. Whoever uses this approach, however, needs to be prepared for the possibility they will get pushed around and maybe thrown in jail a few times.

          I still maintain, however, that it’s all about capacity and the burden of proof is on them to PROVE you were driving rather than PRESUMING it. Factual proof will always trump presumptions of law … and it’s virtually impossible for them to prove such a thing.

  13. ed Reply

    June 20, 2015 at 7:53 pm

    I was wondering what if i was driving a car that did not belong to me but was my fathers. I dont have a license and am not associated with the dmv. Can i still tell them that i am not driving and instead travelling even tho the vehicle is my fathers?

    • Makia Freeman Reply

      June 29, 2015 at 9:33 pm

      Yes. Whether you are driving or traveling is a separate issue from who owns the vehicle.

  14. Antonio Williams Reply

    July 5, 2015 at 1:03 pm

    I recently was issused a citation to appear in court for Driving/Traveling While License Supended in Florida because of late payment on Child Support what wwould be my best defense in court.

  15. Antonio Williams Reply

    July 5, 2015 at 1:36 pm


  16. Chris Kampouris Reply

    July 19, 2015 at 6:47 pm

    This is madness.
    A small fee every year is a small price to pay to avoid a life time of legal troubles.

    • Makia Freeman Reply

      July 20, 2015 at 10:04 pm

      As with my previous comment, this path is not for everyone. It is easier to just get a license. However, collectively, the less we stand up for rights and accept the Government turning them into privileges, the more we become enslaved, year by year. What kind of world do you want to leave behind for future generations?

      Freedom requires knowledge, vigilance and courage. It has to be enforced by the public. It’s not going to just happen automatically. Without standing up for your rights or freedom, they will slowly disappear.

  17. Chris Russell Reply

    July 20, 2015 at 10:52 am

    As with any persons or group that tries to assert their agenda by way of vague references to case law, you have not convinced me that those who have successfully challenged their citations did so by making the courts see the light.

    • Makia Freeman Reply

      July 20, 2015 at 10:01 pm

      I’m not trying to convince you to take this path. It’s a hard one, and it’s not for everyone. Information is information. Do with it what you will. There are two fundamental truths here:
      1. The right to travel is a basic, unalienable human right, just as the right to exist, the right to breathe or the right to eat is;
      2. Driving is a privilege (regulated under commercial/maritime jurisdiction) and traveling is a right which cannot, be definition, be regulated.

      I quoted some case law to show how judges from all kinds of courts have upheld this right. I have also personally used this knowledge to successfully overturn fees and fines.

      Do with the knowledge what you will. You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make him drink it.

  18. Angela Reply

    July 21, 2015 at 4:35 pm

    I have court tomorrow for knowingly traveling on a suspended driver’s license. I was wondering if I could use this article in my defense.

    Under the circumstances, I was being a designated driver. My passenger, of whom is un-licensed; was intoxicated. I was not traveling erratically. When stopped, due to being unfamiliar with the new road pattern newly constructed, I was sitting on the “wrong side of the road”. The way the road was constructed … it looked as if at this particular light – right lane turns right, left lane turns left. I was in the left lane waiting for the light to change. The light also is not clearly viewable as you are sitting in the right lane.

    I do plan to pay the fines to obtain my legal ID back (if I must). However, if found that my ID was confiscated without legal prudence, then I’d like to contest the charges and defend myself.

    Thank you
    State of Florida, U.S.A

  19. Andy Reply

    July 22, 2015 at 7:15 pm

    This is an interesting concept but seems pretty useless considering I’m not sure how tyrannical licensing drivers is. I think we can all agree the process to get one is pretty necessary, and once you have it for the most part you don’t have to think about it. The whole point is to ensure the driver is capable of operating a motor vehicle somewhat responsibly, is that really something you think most people should be jumping through legal loopholes to avert? Maybe I’m missing something, but it seems like some people are so eager to feel constitutionally empowered they forget what they’re arguing against is actually pretty reasonable. All it amounts to is a legal pissing contest with some asshole cop who’s doing his job, but you’re giving him a hard time just because you can.

    • Makia Freeman Reply

      July 22, 2015 at 10:46 pm

      Thanks for your comment. I do agree that safety is of paramount importance when operating motor vehicles. It’s too dangerous to have people using them without first getting to a high standard. So, I see part of the need why we have a licensing system.

      However, the problem with the system is that it curbs your rights, makes you liable for silly “infringements” or “infractions”, puts you into the revenue extraction scheme (red light/speeding/seat belt citations) and puts you under the Government’s jurisdiction again. I refuse to be part of the Government’s nefarious schemes to control and make money off the citizenry they are supposedly there to serve and protect.

      For the overwhelming majority of people, we know how to drive. After you have gone through the testing process, you don’t need any more testing. Why beg or ask the Government permission for something you can do naturally, anyway, such as traveling? That puts you in the position of being a subject, servant or slave. The more people do that, the more we give power to an entity that was only ever intended to be small, limited and decentralized – not the sprawling monstrosity it has become.

      • Andy Reply

        July 23, 2015 at 5:02 am

        Thank you for the response. Being accountable for making driving errors that could potentially end lives or cause property damage doesn’t exactly equate to an infringement of rights. I’m not really sure what’s silly about any of the infractions you stated. All of those things have very clear and evident safety reasons for being enforced, even if they may sometimes seem frivolous. Furthermore they’re really easy to avoid along with “revenue extraction” or being under specific jurisdiction as you say. The government may be making money off of traffic violations, but that money also happens to be powerful incentive to impose imperative safety regulations. Any other reason is highly speculative.

        “After you have gone through the testing process, you don’t need any more testing.”

        Exactly, once you’ve passed the test, buckle your seat belt and keep it under 55 (or whatever), the government doesn’t care what you’re doing behind the wheel. You’re not “asking permission” you’re entering into a mutual agreement based on your desire to get from A to B and their desire to not see you plow into the side of some minivan because you ran a red light. I’m not sure how you draw such a straight line from “man, drivers licenses are a bummer” to shackles and chains but it’s impressive rhetoric. Also, if you really want to talk about travel, driving is only one of many forms of doing so and also happens to be one of the most accessible, dangerous, and therefore regulated. Do you really believe those things aren’t correlated precisely to each other and not the scheme of a “nefarious” government?

        • Makia Freeman Reply

          July 23, 2015 at 8:10 am

          If you’re coming to this topic cold, the traveling vs. driving distinction may seem like exaggerated “rhetoric”, but in the overall scheme of things – as you can see by my work on The Freedom Articles and also on Tools For Freedom – it’s part of a grander conspiracy to transform the status of the masses from master (creator of Government) to slave (dominated by Government). This is just one more area where excessive regulation dominates. It is entirely possible to be responsible and accountable without needing laws, rules or excessive regulation. Something is really wrong when the Government is actually incentivized to trick and catch people on the roads to try to underhandedly get money from them. Furthermore, many of the “infractions” (e.g. not wearing your own seat belt, driving 5-10 miles more than the speed limit, etc.) are not necessarily dangerous to others. Government always uses the excuse of “safety” to further its centralization of control – just look at the crimes committed by tyrants who claimed they wanted to bring “peace, order and security” to their nation (e.g. Hitler) or hide secrets from the public under the rubric of national security.

          “Exactly, once you’ve passed the test, buckle your seat belt and keep it under 55 (or whatever), the government doesn’t care what you’re doing behind the wheel.”

          Yes it does – it insists you carry a valid license or else it revokes your privilege of driving. That’s the whole point. Why should Government have so much power it can revoke what is really a right? The Founding Fathers set things up so that rights were unalienable and could not be regulated … but it takes an aware and educated populace to know and enforce that.

          • Martin

            August 9, 2015 at 8:19 am

            I am fairly new to the concept of our right to travel. While reading the conversation between you and Andy I fell there is something left out. In my readings I have come to the understanding that we have a right to travel that cannot be restricted by any law (i.e. license) as long as we are not being employed as a driver (i.e. taxi driver). However, correct me if I’m wrong, I believe you can impose safety measures like speed limits and stop lights for public interest. That being said they cannot stop you from traveling on the road but can cite you for doing so unsafely. The more I read about the right to travel, the more I agree with it. But I still believe we need these safety measures or else traveling will become far more dangerous than it already is.

          • Makia Freeman

            August 11, 2015 at 1:24 am

            Thanks for your comment. You make a fair point. When a Government imposes restrictions based on a genuine care for the safety and security of the public, I think most people are fine with that and would readily accept it. However, I believe most people have an inherent idea of safety and common sense, and it is questionable how much we need a Government to step in and regulate these things.

            The problem arises when power-hungry leaders gain control of the political apparatus and use the excuse of “public safety” and “national security” ad nauseam to control people. That is the atmosphere in which we live – an out of control Government and military-intelligence-industrial-complex that gets away with anything by using the trite excuse of national security.

        • Cory Reply

          July 23, 2015 at 10:51 am

          So you really think that buckling your seat belt should be regulated be the government? You think the government cares if something happens to you behind the wheel or not? Like a police officer friend of mine told me, all these little frivolous laws like no seat belt, one headlight out, air freshener hanging, are only there to be used as probable cause to pull you over in the first place. Once stopped, the “real investigation” begins. Last week, the Texas U.S Circuit of appeals just deemed that police have the right to pull you over for air fresheners, rosaries, and pro police stickers because they’re deemed to be accompanied with suspicious activity. It’s crazy how many people will always let their rights be trampled on because the government tells them they need to keep them safe. Instead of enacting all these frivolous laws based on what might’ve happened, harsher laws should possibly be made for someone causing property/ bodily injury to somebody while exercising their rights, if deemed they were being irresponsible. I guess, even though it’s happened all throughout history, government’s always become tyrannical at some point, but even with a document that’s written to protect the people from it, people will always want to oppress themselves anyway and still call it freedom. Seems people want to be ruled and told what they can or can’t do, instead of actually taking responsibility for themselves

    • Josh Reply

      July 22, 2015 at 10:47 pm

      Nobody is saying that you shouldn’t have to prove you’re able to drive a vehicle. The point is, it isn’t the government’s job to baby sit and be in control of who’s responsible or not. To assume that you need a driver’s license, just assumes that everybody is automatically irresponsible. Part of having your rights and freedoms means people have to take responsibility for themselves. When you give away a right for exchange of a privilege, the government will always abuse it. Some states automatically suspend your license for speeding through a school zone. I bet you almost everybody who ever gets caught speeding, don’t know they are even in a school zone. So how is it fair for somebody to lose their right to travel to work because of a victimless crime. I also believe in Virginia, they were trying to make it illegal to get your license if you had a failing grade in high school. The government did not build the roads, it was bought and paid for by the people. People are so eager to give away their liberties for the promise of safety from the government. Truth is, licensing is only required because it’s a cash cow for the state. You really think the government gives a damn if you’re safe on the roads or not? Governments plan their budgets on you not being safe (writing tickets), so therefore, it’d be contradiction of their interest.

      • Andy Reply

        July 23, 2015 at 6:40 am

        The government isn’t “babysitting” anything, it’s not as if there’s a cop sitting in your back seat every time you get behind the wheel. They’re enforcing a very reasonable set of restrictions that happens to include a license, which is very simple to earn and maintain provided the driver is not totally negligent. The government’s assumption you need a drivers license is due to the fact that you weren’t born knowing how to physically or mentally operate a motor vehicle, and therefore should have to be tested on those abilities before you’re granted one. Responsibility doesn’t even really enter into the equation except as a lecture from your parents.

        “Part of having your rights and freedoms means people have to take responsibility for themselves.”
        Rights and freedoms have nothing to do with whether you know how to properly signal a lane change or not.

        “When you give away a right for exchange of a privilege, the government will always abuse it.” Not even sure what that means but either way it’s highly rhetorical. To me abuse is like, a parent hitting their kid or something, what are you talking about?

        “Some states automatically suspend your license for speeding through a school zone. I bet you almost everybody who ever gets caught speeding, don’t know they are even in a school zone.” Pesky school kids, rum ’em over I say! I’ve never once had a problem understanding whether I was in a school zone or not. Yellow sign, speed limitation, often times flashing lights or even a speed trap. What’s the confusion? The penalty is fair because dead children are sort of a liability I guess. The law doesn’t always deal in the identification of a “victim,” often times it involves preventive measures which, like it or not happen to keep people from dying or being injured.

        No the government did not single-handedly build or pay for the roads, but they did delegate the people who did and also organized and dispersed the funds to do so. Just like Steve Jobs didn’t build Apple he made it possible for others to do so.

        “People are so eager to give away their liberties for the promise of safety from the government.”
        Again, what’s with the extraneous rhetoric? How do you go from a driver’s license requirement to “the British are coming.”

        “Truth is, licensing is only required because it’s a cash cow for the state.” I don’t even know how much a license cost these days but I don’t seem to remember the price being anything out of hand. How does that even enter into cash cow territory? Seems like it would just go back into the overhead of their shitty employees.

        “You really think the government gives a damn if you’re safe on the roads or not?” Yeah I do. Believe it or not, all of the people’s jobs in government positions whether they may be local or otherwise are contingent upon results i.e. people’s lives, property damage, etc. Yes, governments plan their budgets around taxation, and tickets happen to sort of fall under that category. It’s sort of like cigarette smoking. No one gets excited when people die of lung cancer, but fools are going to do it anyway so you might as well make a little money off it and possibly turn a few people off in the process.

        • Matt Reply

          July 23, 2015 at 10:57 am

          Wow, wouldn’t even know where to start with this guy. Some of your points make no sense because you clearly didn’t understand the comment. Also unbelievable how scary brainwashed you are

  20. D L Reply

    July 23, 2015 at 5:00 am

    How would this apply if your licence is suspended

    • Makia Freeman Reply

      July 23, 2015 at 8:33 pm

      Were you caught on the roads with a suspended license? If so, you need to argue you were traveling not driving at the time of the alleged infraction. If you want to use the roads and your license is suspended, I would suggest giving us a call (1800-770-8802 x4) for an alternative travel idea.

  21. Tom Reply

    July 23, 2015 at 11:25 pm

    I have applied for and lost the use of my driver’s license. Do I still have the right to travel in my personal vehicle? If not how do I get this back?

    • Makia Freeman Reply

      July 23, 2015 at 11:47 pm

      You always have your natural, unalienable rights. They never disappear. They are like a turtle shell you carry with you everywhere you go. You just haven’t been exercising them.

      If you are doing commerce on the roads (e.g. truck driver, taxi, etc.) you need a license. Otherwise, if you are traveling in a private capacity, you don’t. I would suggest giving us a call (1800-770-8802 x4) for an alternative travel idea.

  22. Cory Fiegen Reply

    July 29, 2015 at 8:18 pm

    Hey this was very informative to me, one question I am 17 currently living on my own, I have been for 3 years now and also have no way of getting my license because I cannot get parental consent. If I were to (travel) would it be considered an illegal offense seeing how I am a minor? I need a way to get to work I have a vehicle but am scared to drive-(travel) without a license. My work is literally 2 minutes driving from my house. I do as minimal driving as possible to get away from being caught but the day is going to come eventually I know it. Please help me and inform me of this! thank you!

  23. Dan Reply

    August 2, 2015 at 2:12 am

    Great article and great discussion. I come at this from a non-US (Australian) perspective. I wonder if in a country where it is considered a right (not a privilege) to bear arms, it becomes very hard to argue that it is not also a right to drive a car. Both pursuits are potentially lethal. It seems US citizens will accept the price in gun violence in order to maintain their gun rights. Maybe US citizens should also accept the price in road fatalities that will come from not regulating who can drive.

    • Makia Freeman Reply

      August 4, 2015 at 8:05 pm

      On an ultimate level, the inherent rights of every human are universal and not dependent on which country you happen to inhabit. I discussed this concept further here:

      Society accepts a certain of risk in exchange for freedom. We all know there is a chance we could die every time we step into a car or fly on a plane, but we assess the risk to be low enough that we are willing to take that chance in order for increased mobility, opportunity, freedom and convenience. This goes for guns too – although stats show that nations with tighter gun control than the US (like the UK) actually have higher murder rates, because people are less likely to be armed in self-defense (

      The question here is this: is there a connection between a lower rate of road fatalities and Government-regulated drivers’ licenses? There is in the area of revoking licenses of those who drink alcohol and drive (although these people are the irresponsible statistical outliers). But outside of that, I doubt there is a significant connection. Meanwhile, the licensing system has become a devious means to set up a control grid to entrap people in revenue extraction schemes which have everything to do with stealing money from citizens – and nothing to do with safety, although it is a noble-sounding pretext for government-sanctioned robbery.

  24. Robert Reply

    August 3, 2015 at 4:13 pm

    Ya the joke is you can speed / drive without a licence till you get caught!?!?! Like anything else … you are right that it can be different breaking the law at 17 (minor) than breaking it as an adult (but the judge can try you as “an adult” as we see from time to time!
    That said its not the driving that’s the issue here, its driving without insurance … who knows what happens if you get in an accident without insurance (and you are at fault) … do without the car or if its only two minutes away … bike for now !!!

  25. Jacob Reply

    August 5, 2015 at 6:12 am

    I’ve lost my license and won’t be able to get a replacement for a few days at least. My question is, does a minor have the right to travel? A 17 year old?

    • Makia Freeman Reply

      August 6, 2015 at 9:04 pm

      Good question. I do not know the answer. I would assume that as long as you as completely capable and proficient in operating a motor vehicle safely, you would be able to exercise your right to travel, but that is an assumption on my part. You could try giving us a call at 1800-770-8802 x4 for alternative travel ideas.

  26. Dennis Reply

    August 7, 2015 at 7:46 am

    I have to agree with you. Your articles here are right. I live in Pennsylvania and I never got a license in my life. I was pulled over for traveling 5 times in my life. It’s all a money scheme for courts and government. Each time I get pulled over they tack another year on my suspension. Now how can they suspend a license I never had? Please send me a link I can print of to keep in my vehicle while I’m traveling to show the next officer that I have the right to travel. Thanks for your information!

  27. funkenstein Reply

    August 9, 2015 at 3:41 am

    Great article, but I have to wonder: where have you traveled? The globe is covered with armed nazi checkpoints. I know “papers please” in a few languages. My daughter at age 0 was almost kept from her mother (only allowed to remain after extensive costs) because “visa not approved” when we traveled to: the UK. This is as spoiled middle class academics mind you. I know plenty who are separated from their families for decades because travel (not driving mind you) is universally considered valid control of fascist state. Right now millions of people are unable to go where they need to for work and family. Thousands are in tears at this moment. And yet people still talk of “enforcing immigration” by preventing travel. Yes, we have the “right to travel” as you say but right now not a single established legal system in the world honors this right, and every one of them honors the right of uniformed fascists to prevent you from traveling!!! Garry Davis RIP had the right idea. Anyway, keep up the good work I will return to read your column.

    • Hugh Mann Reply

      October 8, 2015 at 3:14 am

      While I agree that most places people would not get away with traveling without a license, in the united states of America, we’ve got the high joker – The Constitution. Until the day our government takes the last of our weapons, admits that we’re all sharecroppers, we can’t own land, and our money is worthless, they have to keep up the charade that we’re still operating under Constitutional law.
      Until martial law is declared, let’s just have some good ole’ fun.

  28. Justin Reply

    August 20, 2015 at 3:46 pm

    My license is currently suspended after being involved in a car accident. I am also a person with a disability, whose civil rights were violated by the police and state. Unfortunately, I hired what I thought was competent representation, however, I was provided no defense. I am unable to get a restricted drivers license, as the charge of leaving the scene disqualifys me. Even though my life was threatened with a gun, which is what resulted in me leaving, and I was forced to plead guilty to avoid jail, according to my “attorney.” I would only need to drive my car to get to and from work, as I live and work in the suburbs, where public transportation is not readily available. Is there any way around this, so I am able to “travel” to work? What if I’m on parole and get pulled over for no license? Will that legally result in breaking the conditions of parole? We’ve reached out to my state governors office, who unfortunately has no jurisdiction with the PA DOT, so they were unable to provide me with any help. Any advice or help would be greatly appreciated. Thank you so much!

    • Makia Freeman Reply

      August 20, 2015 at 9:46 pm

      Hi Justin, Thanks for your comment and sorry to hear about your situation. I cannot give “legal advice”. You are always within your rights to travel, as long as you are not driving, which is a privilege regulated in commercial, admiralty jurisdiction. You will have to be prepared to defend your position to police officers and potentially judges. To do that successfully, you need to keep educating yourself about law, rights and sovereignty so you gain confidence.

  29. Joshua Reply

    August 31, 2015 at 12:30 am

    What if I am not a us citizen and only a F1 visa student and thus a temporary visitor? Does what you say also apply?

    • Makia Freeman Reply

      August 31, 2015 at 11:22 pm

      The laws are generally written to apply to “US persons”, meaning citizens and permanent residents. Coming in on a visa necessarily means you have contracted with the US Government and agreed to abide by all its laws, so it’s going to be harder to assert the right to travel. If you choose this, I would expect there to be more resistance from cops and judges than with an average American.

      However, on an ultimate level, the right to travel is a universal human right, regardless of where you live, as I wrote about here:

  30. Josh S. Reply

    September 1, 2015 at 12:36 am

    Love this blog and am ALL about standing up for my rights! I’m tired of everyone allowing the government to control EVERYTHING about us. I’m not here to argue with any of you who are more than happy to continue allowing this to happen, I’m solely here because I’ve been following these blogs for AWHILE now. Yes, they check out and have very supportive FACTS! I, unfortunately, have been fighting with the state of Illinois for eight years now. EIGHT!! Yes, I traveled while intoxicated one time when I was 17. Four years and eight months later I was pulled over after helping a friend move. We stopped at a bar and he wanted to buy me a couple drinks for helping. I refused as I had work very early the next morning. I eventually ended up having ALMOST 3 beers and had a cop waiting for my truck to leave the bar. I made a bad name for myself when I was younger and take full responsibility for it. I changed after serving hard time which this was after that. I misconstrued the law and thought it was OK to travel after a couple beers and yea, definitely did not account for the ZERO tolerance. Whatever, once again I paid my dues and here I am eight and a half years later still fighting for my license! I’ve dumped I don’t even know how much money into this. I seriously want to just give up on tryin to travel myself, but then there’s this. My spirits are lifted, again. My dilemma is, Yea I have a right to travel freely. What about when I’m revoked? And now I DO have a great job opportunity as a linesman apprentice. They work on power lines, which as we all know requires traveling throughout the state or counties really. Is there a way to get this joke of a system under control so I can get my CDL for work?? How can I lose my opportunity to profit from the road if I have never been able to profit from using the road? I mean technically I lost somethin that never existed, correct?

    On another note, if you do return your ID back to the DMV and revoke your contract (which obviously they NEVER tell you you’re doing) how do you go about buying a car, house, smokes, or anything that requires your picture ID showing you and your age? Is that where your passport comes into play, and if so, what if someone were on legal papers (parole, probation, etc) and can’t get a passport? I’m all for doing this to the fullest, but I also want to make sure I can still live my life as needed while doing so. Public transportation is not around for me and I’ve LITERALLY walked over USVI mountains to get to work. But my body can’t take the abuse anymore and am on workman’s comp as I speak. I just want to go through life living the way we were meant to, and be on my pursuit of happiness. Can you give insight on this Makia, or is this state, as all lawyers have called this state, the “nightmare state” gonna hinder me from that always? Pleeeeaaaase help. Thank you

    • Makia Freeman Reply

      September 3, 2015 at 10:48 pm

      Thanks for your comment. It’s saddening to hear stories such as this. Unfortunately I don’t see an easy solution. You can try traveling not driving, but if your job requires a license, it’s going to be difficult to get around that. In your case it may be better to try to get a State-issued license. You can use other ID like a passport or State ID card in situations that require a picture ID. I would suggest contacting the authorities and seeing what you have to do to get another driver’s license – or getting one in another county, state or even country if you can.

  31. Brad Reply

    September 8, 2015 at 11:53 pm

    Great discussion!! Ok, so as a Canadian, I’m understanding that all humans have the inalienable right to travel, regardless of country of residence. I’m curious if you know what laws I need to familiarize myself with in order to travel (albeit temporarily) with an accidentally expired license??
    I didn’t even know it was expired – it only expired over the long weekend. And now to my amazement, upon reading the MTO website, I have been informed that they desire to make me start my license process all over again, pay all previously paid fees again, then pay to renew the license, then pay to renew the plates, then pay to renew insurance. It is for these reasons that I completely detest the tyranny of our governments.

    I seem to gather from the comments, that upon registering your vehicle, you’re basically signing your property over to them. Is this true? Does this entitle them to impounding my vehicle? Can I use the “right to travel” with an expired licence in the meantime of trying to come up with all the necessary money to renew it? If so which Canadian law should I refer to and be informed in?

    • Makia Freeman Reply

      September 10, 2015 at 10:10 pm

      Check out the work of Dean Clifford. He’s a Canadian who successfully uses the right to travel. See the video embedded above in this article where Dean quotes Canadian law.

      There are different opinions on registration. Some say registration means signing over the rights to the property being registered. Others say that is not true. The best way to know would be to read the definition of register in Black’s Law Dictionary, but more importantly, in the actual code or law passed. It could be defined differently in each law (such are the tricks of the Law Society). Most laws define key terms before getting into the nuts and bolts.

  32. Amanda Keith Reply

    September 15, 2015 at 7:52 pm

    I have a revoked license in Illinois do these laws apply to me

    • Makia Freeman Reply

      September 17, 2015 at 8:23 am

      The principles in this article apply to anyone, no matter where you live.

  33. Allen Reply

    September 21, 2015 at 9:00 am

    These articles have been extremely helpful. Just wondering with my situation, I have payed fines up to $1100, and yet still my license has been suspended. Do you think I would be able to fight those fines with my right to travel for defense and maybe get a refund?

    • Makia Freeman Reply

      September 21, 2015 at 10:30 pm

      You could try. It may be too late, but see what you can do. You would have to launch an appeal and claim you wrong entered the wrong jurisdiction due to deliberate fraud and deception on their part.

  34. Andres Reply

    September 28, 2015 at 7:39 am

    Soooo if a license is only required if you are using your vehicle for commerce or business, then wouldn’t a license be required to simply use it to travel back and forth for work? In that aspect, the vehicle is indeed being used for business purposes. Work!.. it is business. Hence, business days. There are five business days in a week ;). However, not everyone drives to and from work due to unemployment, so in that aspect, I don’t agree with licenses.

    Traveling for leisure, or personal galavanting is another matter.

    • Makia Freeman Reply

      September 28, 2015 at 10:49 pm

      My understanding is that when you drive to and from work, you are not actually working until you arrive.

  35. Robert miller Reply

    October 1, 2015 at 4:41 am

    I stopped at a convenience store coming home from work. A state trooper was in parking lot when came out of store and got into my vehicle and drove off the officer got in behind me and thrower his lights on and pulled me over door no reason and wrote me a ticket for driving on revoked license I did nothing wrong to be pulled over can I use this legal law to get out of the driving on revoked

    • Makia Freeman Reply

      October 1, 2015 at 7:54 am

      Yes I think you could. It all hinges on you arguing that you were not driving but were traveling at the time of the “alleged” infraction. Sounds like they were trying to trap you and extract revenue from you.

  36. Rayantg Reply

    October 7, 2015 at 8:22 pm

    Thanks for this article. It helps tremendously. As far as registration and insurance are concerned, are we covered by these rights as well? Any information on this would be appreciated.

    • Makia Freeman Reply

      October 7, 2015 at 9:42 pm

      Registration and insurance are more difficult to deal with. Trying to go without registration completely (as some have done, such as “free men” in Montana) will attract unwanted attention. If you want to try to anonymize yourself, you can get a Common Law Pure Trust and find someone to act as a trustee, go to the DMV and register the car in the name of the trust. You could also be an occasional driver on someone else’s insurance.

      However, you could also get normal registration and insurance. Just because you possess these is not proof you are always in commercial jurisdiction. It’s a question of capacity. In what capacity were you acting at the time of the alleged infraction? You can always argue you were privately traveling (not commercially driving), even if you have plates and insurance.

  37. Jason Lang Reply

    October 12, 2015 at 8:56 pm

    I think the right to travel vs drive argument is invalid. Traffic regulation isn’t mentioned in the Constitution therefore the power generally falls to the States pursuant to the 10th Amendment,

    “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.”

    So, it has long been accepted by the federal government that traffic regulation is a proper exercise of State police power. Federal courts uphold the ability of States to regulate road traffic provided it is done so with equality, resonableness and for the public good and doesn’t violate any federal laws or rights.

    All 50 States have seen fit to devise and enact their own traffic codes and police them. If you want to review some Federal court decisions, please review Hendrick v Maryland 235 US 610, Hess v Pawloski 274 US 352, and Reitz v Mealey 314 US 33. These are three solid federal Supreme Court decision that set nationwide precedent that cannot be ignored.

    • Makia Freeman Reply

      October 16, 2015 at 11:14 pm

      There are always two sides to every argument. Yes, we need traffic laws because we live in a society of irresponsible people. If everybody agreed to be responsible then we wouldn’t need as many rules, but if people don’t, then you need a system to keep people in check.

      However, those who know how to extricate themselves from admiralty jurisdiction can enjoy a higher degree of freedom because they have displayed the wisdom and courage to earn it. Those who choose to operate within admiralty jurisdiction do so because they think they are supposed to. Both systems exist.

      • Kevin Reply

        October 20, 2015 at 2:35 am

        There are always two sides to every story, the problem is the side that claims you can drive without a license, and it be completely legal, is false. The court cases cited, not one of them actually touches on the topic of a states right to reasonably enact traffic codes that contribute to public safety. This includes licensing and holding insurance etc.

        The following court case is from the United States Supreme Court:

        Hendrick v. Maryland 235 US 610 (1915)

        The movement of motor vehicles over the highways is attended by constant and serious dangers to the public, and is also abnormally destructive to the ways themselves . . . In the absence of national legislation covering the subject a State may rightfully prescribe uniform regulations necessary for public safety and order in respect to the operation upon its highways of all motor vehicles — those moving in interstate commerce as well as others. And to this end it may require the registration of such vehicles and the licensing of their drivers . . . This is but an exercise of the police power uniformly recognized as belonging to the States and essential to the preservation of the health, safety and comfort of their citizens.

        States have the right, under their police powers to enact and enforce these laws. What these websites never want to admit is that the courts are not subject to legal definitions other than the ones that they use. So states have the right to define what “traveling” is, they also have the right to define what a “motor vehicle” is. Every other legal book with definitions is not valid, only the definitions within a state’s particular traffic code are valid.

        Now we can argue that it isn’t OK for states to do this but it is the law of the land. This has been decided by the only entity that is allowed to interpret constitutional law, and that is the Supreme Court.

        So if you decide to drive without a license, you may be fined, even jailed for refusing to give it up, if you don’t have insurance, you will be fined. If you’re ok with that then please continue, but you have to recognize that the State’s have a right to place traffic laws within their borders.

        There are many other Supreme Court cases that hold to this point, the ones that are posted in this article are invalid because they touch the real issue as mentioned earlier in my comment.

        • Makia Freeman Reply

          October 20, 2015 at 8:33 pm

          Again, as I said in my previous comment, there are 2 systems/jurisdictions in place: common law and commercial/maritime/admiralty law. Commercial law is composed of Acts, Statutes, Regulations, Code, Policy, etc. – all which claim to be “law” but are really just rules that govern certain societies. If you are not a part of that society, those rules do not apply to you. Remember the definition of statute: a rule which has the force of law with the consent of the governed. If you do not give your consent, the statute no longer has the force of law.

          Yes, the States made traffic rules – all statutes. Commercial, statutory law does not apply to someone traveling privately! Many courts have upheld this. I have personally had situations overturned, and helped others have their cases dismissed, based on this knowledge.

          Think about it: how can you be charged under commercial/criminal statutes for the “crime” of not wearing a seat belt or not carrying a license? Every crime must have a victim who can prove damage was done to him with malicious intent. Where is the malicious intent? Where is the provable damage? Where is the victim?

          By the way, the tenth amendment gave any power not explicitly given to the Federal Government back to the States and the People – not just the States. Where do the States get their power? The people. The people are always the source of power for any government. Everything comes back to the consent of the governed. All their “law” or really just rules are based upon you agreeing to enter that jurisdiction and give them your consent.

          • Kevin

            October 22, 2015 at 2:32 am


            Thank you for responding to my comment, I greatly appreciate you taking the time to respond. I would like to bring up a couple of things in response…

            Your division between common law and commercial law is a common division, but:

            1. Common law was received by the individual State governments (former colonies) via reception statutes, clearly subject to the local State constitutions and legislatures (the same legislatures that make the highway codes). State legislation, such as the highway code, made by democratically-elected-and-influenced representatives of the people, is in fact the law of the land and unable to be avoided. The federal Constitution, laws and courts offer no protection for your imagined right to travel unregulated. My previous post shows the Supreme Court saying residents and non-residents, commercial and non-commercial activity on the highways may be regulated by the States for public safety.

            Your statement, in the previous post, was that the people have the power. This is true, but we the people elect officials, they act on behalf of us. That’s how a democracy works. So the argument of being charged under commercial law doesn’t hold any water. I don’t deny that the defenses that you state in your article won’t work, but I am saying that as the law is interpreted there is no clear way of dividing the “travel” vs “driving” definitions. I would assume that most people that drive without a license do so in a very safe manner, but when caught it would appear that you don’t have a very firm foundation on which to stand.

            Again thank you for your response.

          • Makia Freeman

            October 27, 2015 at 12:46 am

            Hi Kevin, I understand that reception statutes were used to harmonize the law, take in all the common law, and place them under the umbrella of the Constitution and statutory law – but does that mean common law has ceased to exist, or that there is no such thing as common law jurisdiction? Judging by the amount of people still successfully claiming common law jurisdiction in courts today, I would say the evidence suggests not.

            For further analysis on this topic, I suggest Johnny Liberty’s book The Global Sovereign Handbook. In it he writes a sample oral defense a citizen may use:

            “CITIZEN: “Your honor, the Constitution authorizes two criminal jurisdictions for the court. One of these is Common law. But under the Common law there must be a corpus delecti or damaged party before the court can recognize any
            jurisdiction. This cannot be a Common law action because there is no sworn complaint from a damaged party. Therefore this court does not have a criminal jurisdiction under Common law.” (If the judge replies that this is a
            Common law court, then demand a “Bill of Particulars.”)

            “The only other criminal jurisdiction authorized for the court is the breech of an International Maritime Contract under the criminal aspects of an Admiralty jurisdiction. I’m not aware of having ever entered any maritime contracts, so I deny that any exist. Can you tell me what jurisdiction the court is exercising in the action against me?”

  38. James B Reply

    October 18, 2015 at 5:41 am

    Hi, Makia, i appreciate all your efforts. You are amazing to me.

    I live in Ontario, Canada and am becoming more and more frustrated everyday, with each interaction i have with local authorities.

    Essentially, after viewing that man’s video at the gas station, i see i have much work to do-learning all the legalities behind “common-law” law, but, who determines that a free person must even adhere to such laws as common-law, and why(you’re own personal opinion) you think we should?

    Thank you so much


    • James B Reply

      October 19, 2015 at 6:04 am

      Also, i was pulled over for driving without plates, though i had a 10 day trip permit. I have a license, sin card, health card, passport and birth cirtificate: can i present myself in court as administrator or agent for my first and last name and claim common law jurisdiction or would that be a double-minded act and fail me in court?

      Thank you

      • Makia Freeman Reply

        October 20, 2015 at 9:05 pm

        Yes you can. The first thing you need to assert upon beginning in court is jurisdiction. It is vital that you establish the difference between the living, breathing you (under common law jurisdiction) and the corporate, capital-letters you (under commercial/admiralty jurisdiction).

    • Makia Freeman Reply

      October 20, 2015 at 9:00 pm

      Good question. Common law came out of some very basic needs/desires for people to feel safe. Some say common law is really just 3 things: don’t hurt another, don’t damage another’s property, and don’t use mischief in your agreements with another. That’s it.

      As long as you live responsibly, no one will have much cause to complain against you … but if they do, the idea was that common law could resolve any disputes peacefully.

      Of course, common law is the antithesis to our current commercial, statutory law which consists of hundreds of thousands of “laws” or regulations on the books. Quite a sizable portion are laws against something, but where there is no actual victim. It makes no sense to declare something a crime when there is no provable criminal/malicious intent, no damage and no injured party.

      The bottom line is this: if you are not harming anyone, what is the basis for the Government hassling you? It has no authority to protect you from yourself (e.g. by claiming you must wear a seatbelt). Tyranny begins when the Government becomes a Nanny and tries to tell you how to live your life in every little detail.

  39. James B Reply

    October 22, 2015 at 7:57 pm

    Thank you so! And, after I assert myself as coming from common law jurisdiction and a separate entity from the corporate name I hold administrator to, what are my requests?

    Thank you, Makia

    • Makia Freeman Reply

      October 22, 2015 at 9:59 pm

      That the statutes and regulations cannot possibly apply to “you” as a living, breathing man, and only to legal fictions like corporations, and that therefore the case be dismissed with prejudice and you be free to go.

      Getting the case dismissed with prejudice means it is over and done with, once and for all, and can’t be brought back to court.

  40. James B Reply

    October 23, 2015 at 1:39 am


    I thank you for that piece of peace of mind> Makia.

    Wouldn’t they just rack the fine up anyway against to corporate card I hold that is property of the province(Drivers License) and, eventually, once I was pulled over next with a license that had been suspended due to fines seize my seize my license and potentially my vehicle or…?

    Thank you

    • Makia Freeman Reply

      October 26, 2015 at 7:53 am

      They can only proceed with the case if you agree to step into corporate jurisdiction. The whole idea is to trick you into being the corporate self, rather than the breathing living human, against whom corporate by-laws do not apply.

  41. Russ Francis Reply

    November 6, 2015 at 11:18 am

    I hear you and I really, really wish you weren’t wrong. But unfortunately THE STATE OWNS THE CAR. And the state can regulate and control that which it owns. So if the State requires a D/L to make THEIR PROPERTY TRAVEL DOWN THE ROAD, it is not infringing on your rights. It is just regulating its property.
    Now the big question is how do we get ownership of the car?

    • Makia Freeman Reply

      November 6, 2015 at 6:33 pm

      I have read different opinions about “registration”. Some say when you register, you sign over ownership or title to the item being registered; others say that you retain ownership and it is merely a recording.

      Do you have definitive evidence that registering your car means giving up ownership of it? If so, can you point me in the direction of it?

  42. dalibor Reply

    November 11, 2015 at 9:45 pm

    Is this possible in EU.

    • Makia Freeman Reply

      November 11, 2015 at 10:46 pm

      I do not know for sure. The right to travel is a universal human right. Every EU nation has a different set of laws, so you would need to find the equivalent of “common law” in that particular country.

  43. Chris McNally Reply

    November 17, 2015 at 4:04 pm

    Forgive me for coming out of left field with this but….. wouldn’t the unalienable human right of traveling mean that technically an illegal immigrant is allowed to travel, since no regulation can be put on traveling, wouldn’t that mean regulations of any kind, like citizenship is regulated……

    • Makia Freeman Reply

      November 17, 2015 at 9:59 pm

      Perhaps. There are people who believe that, and organizations like those promoting there World Passport which are based on this idea. However, the right to travel bumps up against the right to private property. You can move freely, but that doesn’t mean you can go on someone’s else’s land without permission.

  44. Dennis Howard Reply

    November 22, 2015 at 2:30 pm

    I had a motorcycle accident on way home a year ago.didnt hurt no-one or nothing(other than me and MY motorcycle)no-one was around.I just found out I have a warrant for no motorcycle license and expired license.they also wrote me up for unsafe speed which I was doing the speed limit.I reported it on way to hospital via my wife cause I didn’t want to be charged with leaving the scene.the county I reside in told me right to travel was nonsense.HELP ME TEACH THEM PLEASE!

  45. Xinachtli Reply

    November 24, 2015 at 5:38 am

    What most Americans FAIL to understand is, they have been brain washed. Brain washed to believe things that are NOT true and never WERE true. Just about everything you think is true, IS NOT.

    No American can be compelled to do anything. Especially anything contrary to his or her best interests.

    These people telling you you must do this or that have a motive. That motive is control and revenue.

    The rotten fact is, the very government you believe in, isn’t a government at all. It’s a corporation, like Wal-Mart and ALL governmental services agencies; State, Municipal or Federal are NOT legitimate branches of government. The government of 1776 was suspended on March 27, 1861 when the southern states walked out of Congress. A new, secretive corporate government was established July 9th, 1868. Since then of new agencies will state, federal and local cropped up. But these are not constitution departments of government.
    They are administrative, regulatory enforcement agencies enforcing not laws, but legislative codes. The DMV for example is the the administrative office of code pertaining to Motor Vehicles. But do you even know what motor vehicle is? Chances are, you don’t. Do you own or drive one? Not likely, unless you transport property or passengers for hire over the public roadway..

    In America, our earliest ancestors came to escape the tyrannical bounds of feudalism of Europe, but believe me brother or sister, you people are now in deeper bondage than you can even imagine. You are a slave. And a slave can own nothing.

    Untrue? Tell me ONE thing of value you own with no further encumbrance. House? Nope! Bank lien, property taxes, easements,
    insurance payments, code enforcements.

    Your car? Hardly. When you purchase a new car, the original manufacturers title, the MCO/ MSO is handed over the state to be digitally cataloged and then destroyed. You never even see it. But you paid for it. The State then issues you a “color of title”, which is a State granted permission (privilege) to possess the car so long as you make the bank payments, keep insurance payments up to date and pay property taxes.

    Your children? Nope. More and more people are finding their children being taken away over the slightest grievance by government never to be seen again.

    So, what IS your property?

    Are you getting the gist here?

    In fact, according to your friendly government, “The ultimate ownership of [ALL] property is in the State; individual so-called “ownership” is only by virtue of government, i.e., law, amounting to mere user; and use must be in accordance with law and subordinate to the necessities of the State.” Senate Document #43; Senate Resolution No. 62 (Page 9, Paragraph 2) April 17, 1933.

    It was by certain seminal congressional acts from the mid 1800’s since that are not taught in any school that we have been deceived and deprived of the unalienable and constitutional Right of Liberty and had these unlawful acts foisted upon us;

    (1) so-called Civil or municipal rights,

    (2) rules and regulations (statutes), which are NOT law by State legislatures as adjuncts of the Federal corporate government.


    (3) municipal (Roman civil) law in our courts, instead of the Common law upon which our nation was founded.

    This ALL being a SAD state of affairs abhorrent to the Founding Fathers and Framers of the Constitution for which they all risked their lives and fortunes to escape and keep their posterity free . (That would be you!)

    But the truth is,

    “…as a general rule, men have the natural right to do anything which their inclinations may suggest, if it be not evil in itself, and in no way impairs the rights of others.”
    In Re Newman (1925), 71 C.A. 386, 235 P. 664.


    “…every man is independent of [ALL] laws, except those prescribed by nature. He is not bound by any institutions formed by his fellow men without his consent.”
    Cruden vs. Neale, 2 N.C. 338 (1796) 2 S.E. 70.

    Who told you that? No one?
    I wonder why?

    “The State is the name of the coldest of all cold monsters. Coldly it lies; and this lie slips from its mouth: I, the state, am the people.”
    -Friedrich Nietzsche

    It has been only by blinded belief through ignorance that the People have allowed themselves to be so governed on a tyrannical path that binds us to wretchedness which the occupiers of these seats of unlawful government have placed upon us.

    But, be of good cheer! You can change that at any time. Not alone,… but those who know and understand the same. Education is our tool. The true law itself is our sword. They fear us. Have no doubt. They know well their treachery and treason.

    Just as a single bee can be ignored, so can a maddened hive kill its invaders.

  46. james Reply

    November 24, 2015 at 6:31 pm

    I gave this a shot after I returned home from UK and realized I had forgotten to get the reg sticker few months passed and hadn’t updated my license for a year, so I chanced a 2 hour trip north and got stopped by plate reader and cop with satellite flagging system apparently who nearly clipped me head on. I talked calmly and respectfully with the officer stating my traveling purpose. It’s true, they just repeat “driving is a privilege” like they are robots, but he ended up being an alright guy for once in my life. He even said, ” If I let you drive we’re both in the same boat” literally made me laugh right there.I managed to stand in my rights enough to prevent the car being towed but when it came to signing ticket, well, they will arrest you alot of times so I signed, “I conditionally accept retaining rights and privileges” with initials after. Strangely I called the magistrate day before ticket was supposedly due needing a plea and 50 bucks, and she said they hadn’t received it yet after 14 days and to call back after weekend monday. So I figured welp, hopefully they will throw it out or send a counter offer. I called back monday, she put me on hold awhile then finally came back with a ticket number. The thing was the officer put no total, and on the back of the contract “which they don’t let you read!” it said “if no total call or appear”. Place was 2 hours away from home so I told her, I’m not agreeing to a contract or starting payment on something with no proof of a total on paper, signing a blank check!.
    Long story short, file papers/counter offers notarized and certified mail or they will dick you around. They sent a notice of license suspension when I was supposed to get a total in the mail, then when I called for the total again they sent an arrest warrant notice the day after I finally got it, in other words with no time to respond. Ended up paying 600 for damned useless little sticker which serves no purpose and chattel corporate slave card I don’t want to renew at all. The normal PA fine is 500 for 80 dollars of petty things. So, file your documents, phone does not count, even when they talk all nice and you think you’ve broken through some magic wall, they are liars. Though I got no penalties for no plea, and did it over the phone with some 3rd party private corporation and had to pay the constable 100 dollar fee cuz they dicked me around and I didn’t file things, but I defeated the scary contract back side, kind of. I felt good, then broke, then defeated and pissed again. Seriously a registration sticker serves no purpose other than paying dmv and them personally for no crime, no injured party or property. crooks

    I’d maybe recommend talking to a sheriff or representative of the area you intend to travel first, and have a prepared identification statement for police who don’t know you’re passing through, or living there. Be respectful military style, they love power, indulge them a bit.

    Soo, everyone needs to know this stuff, we need mass awakening or they will likely just tune you up. We need researchers to follow the money and publish, or else a government official to give you a personal free pass and notification to police departments. Otherwise, it worked a bit, I just messed it up. But I wasn’t really trying to go all the way to common law court, or Pa supreme court, I just wanted to not be towed really. If anyone actually travels, please prove and show us how. Maybe if I had filed counter offers they would eventually just dismiss it, or if I knew how to make a bonafied affidavit and claim breach of contract under UCC maybe I could have filed a lien on them for the suspension thing, or for deprivation of constitutional rights. Or maybe when it comes down to it, it’s just people, money worship, and the law flexed in all directions like a ship without a rudder in a corrupt satanic world of greed and ego. I still do not want to be chattel slave paper because China might want their property soon. Damned US and FED selling americans like inventory.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *