My project to halt Jim Crow in Tennessee by restraining police powers upon travelers in cars and trucks stands on an important concept. That is that police do not have authority to stop travelers on the road if they’re not involved in commercial activity and if the people in the car or truck are merely exercising their rights.
An important component of my research into malicious law enforcement by state actors is coming into view. I believe I have found the nail by which we can “nail their tongue to the table” and halt widespread abuse by the state of the people.
The question is this: How come you are not required to get a motor carrier permit to use your car to get to work, go to church, attend a Trump rally or run down to the Aldi for some shredded cheese?
Yes — you hear me right. On what grounds is the state not requiring you to sign up as a motor carrier and get a F$50 annual federal permit (at Tenn. Code Ann. § 65-15-109)? My reading of the motor vehicle law at Tenn. Code Ann. § Title 65, chapter 15, indicates that a tool with which to stop Title55 “police power” abuse is at hand.
By properly using administrative law and the elements in the law itself, I believe we can force State of Tennessee to petition the general assembly for a major rewrite of the law in favor of the private sector. The rewrite would clearly separate commercial users of the road from private, truckers from pleasure users of the road (aka “traveling public,” as it’s called in the code). They are separate now, but law enforcement pretends that there isn’t a separation.
Activists and petitioners might be able to overturn the existing oppressive system by suing to force state government to require every private user of a car to get a motor carrier permit because the statute does not exempt us.
That’s right. Soccer moms, ministers, lawyers, city council members, office workers, artists, restaurant owners, furniture store clerks and others who travel about by car are not exempted from Title 65, motor carriers, and it is illegal for the state to continue ignoring its duty under statute and force all of them to obtain motor carrier permits, I suggest.
Are you starting to see what I’m driving at? We force the state to require motor carrier permits for all licensees not exempted, and force state government to request a general assembly rewrite if it doesn’t want to launch a program against millions of licensees who today are not in compliance. A code revision to our liking would make clear that private users are not subject whatsoever to the privilege regime in Title 65 or Title 55, motor and other vehicles.
Both apply only to commercial users alone.
If Sheriff Hammond, chief David Roddy, the highway patrol and the department of safety keep abusing us by overapplying the statute on noncommercial users (continuing Jim Crow, in other words), then let’s make them go all the way.
Let’s take their law and insist on obedience in every detail, at every point. Overenforcement and ultra vires enforcement (outside the scope, outside the view) are bad for us. Meanwhile, these guys are ignoring other laws that would be a terrible burden upon their operations if they had to obey them. So let’s make these guys obey these ignored laws. Requiring strict enforcement of what’s written would be bad for them — and would overheat their administration and make running their show nigh impossible, I suspect.
Title 55 and 65 are used to harass, fine, jail, prosecute, injure people by the tens of thousands who are not subject to the law, many of whom face ruin and economic misery on account of longstanding abuse of the shipping law against people who are not involved in shipping. We can halt a form of state crime against the people by forcing state actors to obey every last letter of their administrative overlordlery.
We can play the Vladimir Bukovsky card, in other words. We can make them mind the jot and tittle, as the Lord refers to them.
The killer list
Here now is the “every last letter” of state law that DHS and cops ignore, but which we can use to our advantage to overturn a wicked system of state commerce and restore constitutional rights.
The Tennessee code is administrative law. Title 55 is administrative law applied upon parties who exercise a state privilege. These parties under department of safety control are involved in the transportation business. Title 65, chapter 15, is the motor carrier statute.
The general assembly lists example vehicles not serve it to the motor carrier statute. The key thing to note is that common users of the road, people like you, private users, noncommercial users, are not listed among those who are exempt from this motor carrier permit system.
Briefly, the exempt vehicles and their uses are as follows. Ask yourself why you and your car and its activity are not on the “exempt list.”
65-15-103. Exempt vehicles — Applicability.
(a) The provisions of this part, except those providing for safety inspection and safety rules and regulations for motor vehicles provided for in § 65-15-111, do not apply to any motor vehicles, while used exclusively:
For brevity, I recast the list of 19 exempt categories without quoting:
Airport limousines, ambulances and hearses, charter vehicles, commuter vans, “intracity transfer [services],” limousines, milk delivery trucks, newspaper delivery vehicles, “passenger hauling demonstration projects,” railroad limousines, school and church vehicles, fertilizer haulers, sedans “in sedan service,” shuttles, taxi cabs, asphalt makes haulers, or sand gravel haulers, vehicles hauling recycling materials, the trolley and products haulers.
My car or “vehicle” and its uses are not in this list. I am not on this list as a traveler on the public right of way. I am not on this list as someone who is “commerce ready” with a Class D license in my green Toyota RAV 4.
I am not exempt. So, on what authority has the state failed to notify me of my disobedience? How and why am I not being held to account for not obeying this law and fulfilling the rules of Title 65?
What about you? If you have a class D driver license, for use transporting people or goods in a vehicle under 13 tons, you are bound under the motor carrier statute because you’re not exempt, either.
My idea is to force the state to abandon its commercial government oppression of travel by requiring it to round up everybody into the federal unified carrier registration system in accordance with 49 U.S.C. § 13908.
That would make the bureaucracy petition or relief by unloading all Class D users (noncommercial, private people).
But is there a better approach? Is this backhanded complicated? Might there be a better way to sue or the right to travel and communicate, especially after courts have shot down the right to travel in Tennessee?
Traffic stops a tax issue
Jim Crow is oppression under the mechanism of tax enforcement. The state wants to force everyone on the road into a privilege, into a taxable activity. The state forces everyone into a taxable activity, that of transportation. The driver license is a receipt for a tax paid, the supreme court has said. So is the registration plate.
The tax is on the privilege of operating a motor vehicle, which is to say commerce. A privilege is a business or occupation or activity affecting the public interest.
Greedy for gain, the state in its prosecution of blacks, the poor, orphans and widows and others circumvents the need to identify a class of people who are not subject to taxation and regulation.
Who are these people? The free people in the state of Tennessee.
A license is proof of a privilege tax. What makes you subject to the license? Again, an occupation. Participation in interstate commerce. Congress controls these definitions. Both the road and the vehicle are instrumentalities of commerce or channels of commerce.
Regulating the costs associated with the rental and operation of motor vehicles as ‘instrumentalities’ of interstate commerce, on roads and interstate highways which are “channels” of interstate commerce, must necessarily have an ‘impact’ on interstate commerce. In this case, however, the channels implicated are roads and highways, which are one of the most traditional ‘channels of commerce,’ even when the particular road in question does not directly lead to another state. United States v. Ballinger, No. 01-14872 (11th Cir. 01/10/2005)
A vehicle is a special self-propelled device used in commerce. Congress cannot regulate anything not in commerce. It can’t regulate something nor can it regulate an activity not in commerce. Interstate activity is regulable by congress, and by the state DOS.
An important Tennessee case makes a clear distinction between free use o the highway as opposed its use under taxable “permissive privilege” even though the state high courts pretend there are not two classes.
We are of opinion that there is no ambiguity about the ordinary meaning of the expression ‘public highway.’ We think there can be no doubt that the common understanding of a public highway is such a passageway as any and all members of the public have an absolute right to use as distinguished from a permissive privilege of using same.
Standard Life Ins. Co. v. Hughes, 203 Tenn. 636, 315 S.W.2d 239, 1958 Tenn. LEXIS 229 (1958).
Interstate commerce and privilege are the keys to unraveling the mystery. By our understanding these two concepts, I believe, we will thwart the barking dogs of the police state, the Jim Crow state, in Tennessee, as God requires of us.
Speaking of dogs. The state cannot enforce a dog leash dog if you don’t have a dog. Yet that’s what’s been happening in Hamilton County for decades. The state enforces commercial trucking law on people not involved in commercial trucking.