Question for the LEO's

[forbes]

This still doesn't say what you think it does... you don't have the right to break the law while exercising your "god given rights".

your highlighting out of context, please re-read

[Doug Hatton]

This still doesn't say what you think it does... you don't have the right to break the law while exercising your "god given rights".

my ignorance for cut copy paste, that refers to commercial travel in which you receive monies for.. here is the one for public travel

"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 at will, but a common right which he has under the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Thompson v. Smith, 154 SE 179.
2 more
"The right to travel is a part of the liberty of which the citizen cannot be deprived without due process of law under the 5th Amendment." Kent v. Dulles, 357 US 116, 125.

"Undoubtedly the right of locomotion, the right to move from one place to another according to inclination, is an attribute of personal liberty, and the right, ordinarily, of free transit from or through the territory of any State is a right secured by the 14th amendment and by other provisions of the Constitution." Schactman v. Dulles, 96 App DC 287, 293.

and finally
Every police officer should keep the following U.S. court ruling in mind before issuing citations:

"The claim and exercise of a Constitutional right cannot be converted into a crime." Miller v. U.S., F.2d 486, 489.

[Machx2]

you might want to do a little research on your own with disregard to what the academy has brainwashed you into believing, let me guess.. your a marine as well?

Brainwashed? Hardly. Marine? Nope. Former military? Yes. Just wondering, what does the marine statement have anything to do with my initial post?

[Grimpala]

my ignorance for cut copy paste, that refers to commercial travel in which you receive monies for.. here is the one for public travel

"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 at will, but a common right which he has under the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Thompson v. Smith, 154 SE 179.

Cut up your DL and let us know how that statute works out for you. That's kind of like the argument that the sonstitution does not allow for a federal income tax. Yeah it may be true, but none of us on this board have the monies to find out and/or prove it.

[forbes]

I don't think this says what you think it says....

my ignorance for cut copy paste, that refers to commercial travel in which you receive monies for.. here is the one for public travel

"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 at will, but a common right which he has under the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Thompson v. Smith, 154 SE 179.
2 more
"The right to travel is a part of the liberty of which the citizen cannot be deprived without due process of law under the 5th Amendment." Kent v. Dulles, 357 US 116, 125.

"Undoubtedly the right of locomotion, the right to move from one place to another according to inclination, is an attribute of personal liberty, and the right, ordinarily, of free transit from or through the territory of any State is a right secured by the 14th amendment and by other provisions of the Constitution." Schactman v. Dulles, 96 App DC 287, 293.

and finally
Every police officer should keep the following U.S. court ruling in mind before issuing citations:

"The claim and exercise of a Constitutional right cannot be converted into a crime." Miller v. U.S., F.2d 486, 489.

[Grimpala]

first... . The presumed right to travel, however, is firmly established in U.S. law and precedent. In U.S. v Guest, 383 U.S. 745 (1966), the Court noted, "It is a right that has been firmly established and repeatedly recognized." In fact, in Shapiro v Thompson, 394 U.S. 618 (1969), Justice Stewart noted in a concurring opinion that "it is a right broadly assertable against private interference as well as governmental action. Like the right of association, ... it is a virtually unconditional personal right, guaranteed by the Constitution to us all.
second... "Even the legislature has no power to deny to a citizen the right to travel upon the highway and transport his property in the ordinary course of his business or pleasure, though this right may be regulated in accordance with the public interest and convenience." Chicago Motor Coach v. Chicago, 169 NE 22.

3rd... in 3 years all your grammar lessons will be null and void. welcome to the new age of education.. i don't agree, but we have become a community of ease, not rules

That says nothing about operating a motor vehicle on said highway, I bolded the section that deals with regulation for you.

isn't shit eating two words?

Sorry, I forgot the hyphen.

[Doug Hatton]

I don't think this says what you think it says....

first... . The presumed right to travel, however, is firmly established in U.S. law and precedent. In U.S. v Guest, 383 U.S. 745 (1966), the Court noted, "It is a right that has been firmly established and repeatedly recognized." In fact, in Shapiro v Thompson, 394 U.S. 618 (1969), Justice Stewart noted in a concurring opinion that "it is a right broadly assertable against private interference as well as governmental action. Like the right of association, ... it is a virtually unconditional personal right, guaranteed by the Constitution to us all.
second... "Even the legislature has no power to deny to a citizen the right to travel upon the highway and transport his property in the ordinary course of his business or pleasure, though this right may be regulated in accordance with the public interest and convenience." Chicago Motor Coach v. Chicago, 169 NE 22.

3rd... in 3 years all your grammar lessons will be null and void. welcome to the new age of education.. i don't agree, but we have become a community of ease, not rules

[forbes]

Fixed

Nobody is going to believe a shiteating thing you say if you keep posting mishmashed shit like this.

And so this isn't a totally bashing post, where is it stated that I don't need a 'driver's' lic. to drive?

isn't shit eating two words?

[forbes]

Fixed

Nobody is going to believe a shiteating thing you say if you keep posting mishmashed shit like this.

And so this isn't a totally bashing post, where is it stated that I don't need a 'driver's' lic. to drive?

first... . The presumed right to travel, however, is firmly established in U.S. law and precedent. In U.S. v Guest, 383 U.S. 745 (1966), the Court noted, "It is a right that has been firmly established and repeatedly recognized." In fact, in Shapiro v Thompson, 394 U.S. 618 (1969), Justice Stewart noted in a concurring opinion that "it is a right broadly assertable against private interference as well as governmental action. Like the right of association, ... it is a virtually unconditional personal right, guaranteed by the Constitution to us all.
second... "Even the legislature has no power to deny to a citizen the right to travel upon the highway and transport his property in the ordinary course of his business or pleasure, though this right may be regulated in accordance with the public interest and convenience." Chicago Motor Coach v. Chicago, 169 NE 22.

3rd... in 3 years all your grammar lessons will be null and void. welcome to the new age of education.. i don't agree, but we have become a community of ease, not rules

[Doug Hatton]

I'm ok with doing whatever you want to your car to make it your own style or whatever, but when I almost run into your POS because I can't even SEE it at night then something's wrong. If they can invent something that makes the lens absolutely BLACK but still be clearly visible, I'm all for it.... some of these beaters with the painted black lenses really are a danger to people around them....

[Osiris]

you might want to do a little research on your own with disregard to what the academy has brainwashed you into believing, let me guess.. your a marine as well?

You are a strange dude.

[Grimpala]

You might want to do a little research on your own with regard to what the academy has brainwashed you into believing, let me guess, you're a marine as well?

Fixed

Nobody is going to believe a shiteating thing you say if you keep posting mishmashed shit like this.

And so this isn't a totally bashing post, where is it stated that I don't need a 'driver's' lic. to drive?

[BMCSean]

Should be illegal to have tail lights that gay.

The factory ones, I know.

[BMCSean]

^^^^We can't all drive a gt vert.....

Anyways, thanks for the input, I see the points on both sides but of course I feel they are legal. I will go to court and hopefully get it thrown out, if not I'll pay the fine and keep my tinted taillights .

[Taylor]

the "style police" should write you a ticket for the blacked out lights, not so sure about the coppell pd.

god bless.

Should be illegal to have tail lights that gay.