Uncategorized

Administrative notice is effort at race reparations in Chattanooga

Rev. Timothy Carreathers, center, seen here at his church, takes part in a weekly protest against Sheriff Jim Hammond for a violent traffic stop against Myron James Mitchell that was subject to transportation administrative notice. (Photo David Tulis)
Chief David Roddy of Chattanooga police department enforces a Jim Crow practice on blacks and others in Chattanooga by rejecting constitutional rights and enforcing Title 55, the state trucker law, beyond its lawful scope, despite having been put on notice. (Photo Chattanooga police department)
Sheriff Jim Hammond, the county’s most powerful man, is imposing the state shipping and freight law upon people not involved in shipping and freight. (Photo David Tulis)

If we are to believe the presentation made in the book The Problem of Slavery in Christian America, white people in this country owe a great debt to blacks even today, particularly since Christianity in the South and the North helped institutionalize and defended the institution of chattel slavery.

By David Tulis / NoogaRadio 92.7 FM

James Myron Mitchell, given a body cavity search in a Title 55 traffic arrest conducted by Sheriff Jim Hammond based on custom, not on law.

Joel McDurmon and others in the Christian Reconstruction movement propose personal reparations of individual white Christians and others doing personal works of mercy and charity to blacks whom they know. They do not recommend any sort of state-based reparation program, which has nowhere been seriously considered as a remedy or giveback to blacks. The personal approach is in keeping with the scriptures which argue in the law of God that the alien should not be vexed, the stranger not oppressed and that equity be the controlling theory of society.

Another way Christians and others in Chattanooga can bring about a reparation of the white race to the black race is by pushing for the removal of unlawful oppression that continues even today against blacks.

The work of reparations of the white race in favors of the black is, in my case, the research that has gone into Transportation Administrative Notice Tennessee.

This document in a nutshell explains how police and deputies enforcr the traffic statutes outside the scope of authority in the law. It is outside the scope of the law even though the Tennessee Supreme Court upholds the use of this law against people who are exercising or defending the right of travel (using the road without a “valid license.”)

Supreme courts in our history have a bad name for deserting their role in establishing justice. They do so by delivering unjust rulings. Roe vs. Wade (kill babies). Obergefell v. Hodges (deconstruct marriage). Dredd Scott (uphold private slavery). 

This image is on the cover of the Joel McDurmon book that exposes the Christian church’s complicity with American chattel slavery starting in the late 1600s.

The poor, the African-American, the immigrant and the ignorant are fed into the meat grinder judicial system in Hamilton County and in the 94 other counties across the state by the widely accepted use of Title 55, motor and other vehicles, illicitly against them.

I propose that in the interest of racial healing of people starting in Chattanooga and Hamilton County a removal of the oppressive system of enforcement that grinds black people to pieces.

And that would be a removal of traffic enforcement under Tennessee titles 55 and 65 and under federal Title 49, all involving transportation in the use of the people’s roads in Tennessee. Laws in these books are a leading cause that black people get caught up in the courts and jails. Misuse of these statutes lowers the constitutional standard for probable cause and allows for easy arrest of members of the public, especially black people.

Courts, lawmakers complicit vs. the people

Hamilton County and the City of Chattanooga have been given administrative notice about the scope of these laws and the authority of state actors to enforce them across the state. Administrative notice is required because of the logjam brought about by the Tennessee high court that refuses to accept the constitution’s unalienable and inherent personal right to travel in an automobile or self-propelled conveyance from point A to point B without the state’s permission and apart from the state’s constitutional authority to regulate freight.

The Tennessee high court denied a petition for hearing from Arthur Jay Hirsch on his conviction on four counts, three of them for traffic and one of them on the right to bear arms.

Reform is not coming from Nashville — not from the executive branch or the judicial branch or the legislative branch. People in these branches are accustomed to the operation of commercial government, and none of these branches is willing to accept the people’s right to freely associate, communicate and travel.

Extra-statutory power

Judge Roger Taney and the Dred Scott decision said blacks could not possibly have any constitutionally guaranteed rights because then they would be free to be on the road without permission or license. But because the white establishment has allowed the oppression of blacks even now, everyone in the state of Tennessee is under jan oppressive extrajudicial extra-statutory operation of state power against individual men and women who are called as among “the free people” in the constitution.

It is time for black people to stand up on their rights as ostensibly delivered back to them from the war to prevent Southern independence and the federal civil rights act.. Administrative notice lets them do just that one town, one county at a time. This is a ground-up reform based on individual assertion of rights and the respect owed by police officers and sheriff’s deputies to these people in the exercise of these rights.

Simple reform

I propose that the sheriff’s department and the city governments insert a new question at every arrest/stop under the Title 55 transportation law (presuming, of course, they have authority to apply it to begin with).

The officer’s new question is:

Ma’am [sir], are you using this car as a motor vehicle — are you operating it on the public road for hire, as a carrier for profit, carrying goods or people for profit and private gain?

If the person says yes, the officer has the duty, in light of the traffic infraction, to ask that person for his driver license, his insurance proof and registration of his car as a motor vehicle. 

If that person says no, all the officer can do is point out that the traffic laws are advisory for all private parties and if possible the member of the traveling public might honor these as worthy strandards, voluntarily self-imposed, though no crime has been committed, and he’s alleging no crimes. The officer makes it quick to not delay the person, and says farewell and safe travels because the user of that car is traveling privately on personal business and has not caused any offense whatsoever under Title 39, the state’s criminal law, nor any violation under the criminal code at Title 39.

A simpler version of the question might be: 

Ma’am [or sir], are you using this car for private purposes or are you involved in commerce and transportation?

Sue cop as oppressor, defend self in traffic court: Transportation Administrative Notice

One Response

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.