Sovereign Consulting

[GlimDropper]

I promise to get right on that, as soon as you can help me find an act in this chapter ( http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/ind ... pter%20322 ) that requires and regulates non commercial drivers licenses.

Ummm, Right Here? I'm sorry, is this a trick question? Or is this a really really clever segue into proving how sovcit you're not?

[Patriotdiscussions]

I promise to get right on that, as soon as you can help me find an act in this chapter ( http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/ind ... pter%20322 ) that requires and regulates non commercial drivers licenses.

Ummm, Right Here? I'm sorry, is this a trick question? Or is this a really really clever segue into proving how sovcit you're not?

UM can you not READ?

a valid driver license issued under this chapter.

can you find the act that issues this non commercial drivers license in the chapter please?

[Patriotdiscussions]

I promise to get right on that, as soon as you can help me find an act in this chapter ( http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/ind ... pter%20322 ) that requires and regulates non commercial drivers licenses.

Ummm, Right Here? I'm sorry, is this a trick question? Or is this a really really clever segue into proving how sovcit you're not?

it would look something like this, minus the "commercial" part

322.51 Short title.—This act may be cited as the “Uniform Classified Commercial Driver License Act.”

[TheNewSaint]

can you find the act that issues this non commercial drivers license in the chapter please?

Ooh! Ooh! I know where this is going!

[GlimDropper]

UM can you not READ?

a valid driver license issued under this chapter.

can you find the act that issues this non commercial drivers license in the chapter please?

Right up top.

322.03  Drivers must be licensed ; penalties. —


(1) Except as otherwise authorized in this chapter, a person may not drive any motor vehicle upon a highway in this state unless such person has a valid driver license issued under this chapter.

Other areas of the statute do in fact apply to commercial licensees but that one sure as heck applies to anyone conveying operating transporting Driving their vessel personal conveyance motor vehicle down the roads in the beautiful state of Florida Everywhere.

Can you not sovcit splain why I'm wrong?

[wserra]

My site does not "claim" i sell anything, in fact all remedies are free of charge, its the site you have to be a member of, that is what costs.

Ah. Suppose you are terminally ill with a disease for which there is a cure. Unfortunately for you, I possess all of that particular medication available. Fortunately for you, I don't believe in charging for something necessary to save a life, so it is (how did you put it?) "free of charge". Unfortunately for you, in order to get into my place to get your free medicine, you must pay me $5,000,000. Once you do, the medicine is free.

There is a word for this particular brand of stupidity: sophistry. Courts know it perfectly well.

Now for the legality of my remedies.....
debt/loans= debt validation letter templates, pretty much the same ones you can find on 50 different sites with a 10 second google search.

So you charge for something - oops, pardon me, charge to access something - that people everywhere can get free. How public-spirited of you.

total jurisdictional removal= showing them the legal doctrine of domicile and how we can change it, again, no advice, just information.

Oh, so you're a moving company. Unfortunately, domicile has bupkis to do with criminal jurisdiction. Even in civil matters, every state in the Union has a long-arm statute. So employing Patriotdelusions Movers after being a bad boy is completely useless in relation to jurisdiction. I'm shocked.

stay out of contracts= basically how to avoid falling for the benefits for obligations scams the government is running like say SS.

Damn, son, all you have to do to avoid taking Social Security is not apply for it. As far as not paying the SS tax, though, you have two options: (1) don't work, or (2) commit a series of federal crimes, at least one for each year you work but don't pay it. About which of these attractive options do you "inform" people?

Again, i dont tell people what to do, i simply provide them with information that could help them learn what they need to know.

Thus showing not only sophistry, but also the courage of your convictions.

That's it. Life's too short.

[Patriotdiscussions]

UM can you not READ?

a valid driver license issued under this chapter.

can you find the act that issues this non commercial drivers license in the chapter please?

Right up top.

322.03  Drivers must be licensed ; penalties. —


(1) Except as otherwise authorized in this chapter, a person may not drive any motor vehicle upon a highway in this state unless such person has a valid driver license issued under this chapter.

Other areas of the statute do in fact apply to commercial licensees but that one sure as heck applies to anyone conveying operating transporting Driving their vessel personal conveyance motor vehicle down the roads in the beautiful state of Florida Everywhere.

Can you not sovcit splain why I'm wrong?

I am going to go out on a limb and say english is not your first or second language friend...

issued under this chapter
issued under this chapter
issued under this chapter
issued under this chapter
issued under this chapter


Can YOU show me WHERE (aka statute number) a non commercial drivers license is issued please?

[Patriotdiscussions]

My site does not "claim" i sell anything, in fact all remedies are free of charge, its the site you have to be a member of, that is what costs.

Ah. Suppose you are terminally ill with a disease for which there is a cure. Unfortunately for you, I possess all of that particular medication available. Fortunately for you, I don't believe in charging for something necessary to save a life, so it is (how did you put it?) "free of charge". Unfortunately for you, in order to get into my place to get your free medicine, you must pay me $5,000,000. Once you do, the medicine is free.

There is a word for this particular brand of stupidity: sophistry. Courts know it perfectly well.

Now for the legality of my remedies.....
debt/loans= debt validation letter templates, pretty much the same ones you can find on 50 different sites with a 10 second google search.

So you charge for something - oops, pardon me, charge to access something - that people everywhere can get free. How public-spirited of you.

total jurisdictional removal= showing them the legal doctrine of domicile and how we can change it, again, no advice, just information.

Oh, so you're a moving company. Unfortunately, domicile has bupkis to do with criminal jurisdiction. Even in civil matters, every state in the Union has a long-arm statute. So employing Patriotdelusions Movers after being a bad boy is completely useless in relation to jurisdiction. I'm shocked.

stay out of contracts= basically how to avoid falling for the benefits for obligations scams the government is running like say SS.

Damn, son, all you have to do to avoid taking Social Security is not apply for it. As far as not paying the SS tax, though, you have two options: (1) don't work, or (2) commit a series of federal crimes, at least one for each year you work but don't pay it. About which of these attractive options do you "inform" people?

Again, i dont tell people what to do, i simply provide them with information that could help them learn what they need to know.

Thus showing not only sophistry, but also the courage of your convictions.

That's it. Life's too short.

1. Great, then the courts will have no problem, whenever they catch up to me as you say.
2. Pretty much, just like a lawyer eh?
3. Changing domicile or heck even having a foreign domicile wont save anyone from a crime committed against another person or property so not really sure where you think you are going with that. however, assumptions are the name of your game, so keep on my man.
4. says who? the statutes?

the Internal Revenue Code and regulations do not contain an absolute
requirement that an employer must provide an employee's social security number to the
Internal Revenue Service. 26 USC §6 109(a)(3) provides:

Any person required under the authority of this title to make a return, statement or other
document with respect to another person, shall request from such other person, and shall
include in any return statement, or document, such identifying number as may be prescribed
for securing proper identification of such other person. 26 USC §61 09(a)(3)

The IRS regulation interpreting 26 CFR §6109 provides:

If he does not know the taxpayer identifying number of the other person, he shall request
such number of the other person. A request should state that the identifying number is
required to be furnished under the authority of law. When the person filing the return,
statement, or other document does not know the number of the other person, and has
complied with the request provision of this paragraph, he shall sign an affidavit on the
transmittal document forwarding such returns, statement, or other documents to the Internal
Revenue Service so stating. 26 CFR §301. 61 09-1 (c).

The applicable Federal statute and regulation place a duty on the employer to "request" a
taxpayer identifying number from the employee. If any return, statement, or other document
must be furnished to the Internal Revenue Service and the employer has been unable to
obtain an identifying number from the employee, after requesting the number, then the
employer need only to include on the transmittal document forwarding such returns,
statements, or other documents, an affidavit stating that the request for the number was made.

Until December 1989, 26 U.S.C. §6676 (1989), set forth the penalties for failing to supply
the Internal Revenue Service with the identifying number. This section states that a $50.00
penalty will be imposed for failure of an employer to provide an identifying number on any
document filed with the Internal Revenue Service unless it is shown that the failure is due to
reasonable cause and not willful neglect. The regulation interpreting the statute provides:

Under Section 301.6109-l(c) a payer is required to request the identifying number of the
payee. If after such a request has been made, the payee does not furnish the payer with his
identifying number, the penalty will not be assessed against the payer.

The Omnibus Budget Restoration Act of 1983 (Pub. Law 101-239, Title VII, Section
7711(b)(1)), repealed Section 6676 of the Internal Revenue Code effective for statements or
documents filed after December 31, 1989. Since December 31, 1989, Code Section 6723 has
governed the failure to comply with information reporting requirements. Section 6723
provides that a penalty of $50.00 shall be assessed for each failure to comply with a reporting
requirement. However, 26 USC §6724, provides for a waiver of any penalties assessed under
the code upon a showing of reasonable cause. Section 6724(a) provides:

No penalty shall be imposed under this part with respect to any failure if it is shown that such
failure is due to reasonable cause and not willful neglect. 26 USC §6724(a).

Therefore, the Code and regulations mandate a payer only to request the identifying
number of the employee or payee. If after such a request has been made, the payee does not
furnish the payer with his identifying number, the penalty will not be assessed against the
payer, upon the filing of an affidavit with the Internal Revenue Service stating that a request
for the payee's identifying number was made.

[GlimDropper]

I am going to go out on a limb and say english is not your first or second language friend...

issued under this chapter
issued under this chapter
issued under this chapter
issued under this chapter
issued under this chapter


Can YOU show me WHERE (aka statute number) a non commercial drivers license is issued please?

I already have. You are repeating "issued under this chapter" as if chapter 322.03 does not require non commercial drivers to be licensed. Explain why you believe I'm wrong and oh yes, please do show your work.

[Burnaby49]

This game of whack-a-Mole can go on forever.

[Gregg]

Under Florida Statutes, Section 322.03(1), it is unlawful for a person to drive a motor vehicle on a Florida state highway without a valid driver’s license.

a very quick lookup of THAT statute reads....

322.03 Drivers must be licensed; penalties.—
(1) Except as otherwise authorized in this chapter, a person may not drive any motor vehicle upon a highway in this state unless such person has a valid driver’s license issued under this chapter.
(a) A person who drives a commercial motor vehicle may not receive a driver’s license unless and until he or she surrenders to the department all driver’s licenses in his or her possession issued to him or her by any other jurisdiction or makes an affidavit that he or she does not possess a driver’s license. Any such person who fails to surrender such licenses commits a noncriminal infraction, punishable as a moving violation as set forth in chapter 318. Any such person who makes a false affidavit concerning such licenses commits a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.

"Except as otherwise authorized in this chapter," is addressed in 322.04 Persons exempt from obtaining driver license.—

(1) The following persons are exempt from obtaining a driver license:
(a) Any employee of the United States Government, while operating a noncommercial motor vehicle owned by or leased to the United States Government and being operated on official business.
(b) Any person while driving or operating any road machine, farm tractor, or implement of husbandry temporarily operated or moved on a highway.
(c) A nonresident who is at least 16 years of age and who has in his or her immediate possession a valid noncommercial driver license issued to the nonresident in his or her home state or country operating a motor vehicle of the type for which a Class E driver license is required in this state.
(d) A nonresident who is at least 18 years of age and who has in his or her immediate possession a valid noncommercial driver license issued to the nonresident in his or her home state or country operating a motor vehicle, other than a commercial motor vehicle, in this state.
(e) Any person operating a golf cart, as defined in s. 320.01, which is operated in accordance with the provisions of s. 316.212.
(2) This section does not apply to any person to whom s. 322.031 applies.
(3) Any person working for a firm under contract to the United States Government whose residence is outside this state and whose main point of employment is outside this state may drive a noncommercial vehicle on the public roads of this state for periods up to 60 days while in this state on temporary duty, if the person has a valid driver license from the state of the person’s residence.

Which statute specifically mentions the concept of a 'noncommercial vehicle" and 'a valid noncommercial driver license" so I'd say the "noncommercial" tripe is just that, tripe.


The entire law is accessible here. https://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2012/322.03


Next?

No, No next, we've been down this road with you before. I am not going to allow you ramble around and move the goalsposts and change the ....nope.

Explain, with citations in law or precedent in a Florida court ruling how the above does not mean a normal person driving the family car doesn't need to have a valid driver's license. Until you do, I'll move your off-topic posts somewhere else. We're not gonna play the sovereign language game, I just won't have it.

[Gregg]

322.54 Classification.— sets out the various classes of Commercial Drivers's Licenses for truly commercial use, and then in=t gets down to "everyone else"

(d) Any person, except a person who possesses a valid Class A, valid Class B, or valid Class C driver license, who drives a motor vehicle must possess a valid Class E driver license. Any person who possesses a valid Class E driver license may, subject to the appropriate restrictions and endorsements, drive any type of motor vehicle, other than the type of motor vehicle for which a Class A, Class B, or Class C driver license is required, within this state.

[Gregg]

Under Florida Statutes, Section 322.03(1), it is unlawful for a person to drive a motor vehicle on a Florida state highway without a valid driver’s license.

a very quick lookup of THAT statute reads....

322.03 Drivers must be licensed; penalties.—
(1) Except as otherwise authorized in this chapter, a person may not drive any motor vehicle upon a highway in this state unless such person has a valid driver’s license issued under this chapter.
(a) A person who drives a commercial motor vehicle may not receive a driver’s license unless and until he or she surrenders to the department all driver’s licenses in his or her possession issued to him or her by any other jurisdiction or makes an affidavit that he or she does not possess a driver’s license. Any such person who fails to surrender such licenses commits a noncriminal infraction, punishable as a moving violation as set forth in chapter 318. Any such person who makes a false affidavit concerning such licenses commits a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.

"Except as otherwise authorized in this chapter," is addressed in 322.04 Persons exempt from obtaining driver license.—

(1) The following persons are exempt from obtaining a driver license:
(a) Any employee of the United States Government, while operating a noncommercial motor vehicle owned by or leased to the United States Government and being operated on official business.
(b) Any person while driving or operating any road machine, farm tractor, or implement of husbandry temporarily operated or moved on a highway.
(c) A nonresident who is at least 16 years of age and who has in his or her immediate possession a valid noncommercial driver license issued to the nonresident in his or her home state or country operating a motor vehicle of the type for which a Class E driver license is required in this state.
(d) A nonresident who is at least 18 years of age and who has in his or her immediate possession a valid noncommercial driver license issued to the nonresident in his or her home state or country operating a motor vehicle, other than a commercial motor vehicle, in this state.
(e) Any person operating a golf cart, as defined in s. 320.01, which is operated in accordance with the provisions of s. 316.212.
(2) This section does not apply to any person to whom s. 322.031 applies.
(3) Any person working for a firm under contract to the United States Government whose residence is outside this state and whose main point of employment is outside this state may drive a noncommercial vehicle on the public roads of this state for periods up to 60 days while in this state on temporary duty, if the person has a valid driver license from the state of the person’s residence.

Which statute specifically mentions the concept of a 'noncommercial vehicle" and 'a valid noncommercial driver license" so I'd say the "noncommercial" tripe is just that, tripe.


The entire law is accessible here. https://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2012/322.03


Next?

No, No next, we've been down this road with you before. I am not going to allow you ramble around and move the goalsposts and change the ....nope.

Explain, with citations in law or precedent in a Florida court ruling how the above does not mean a normal person driving the family car doesn't need to have a valid driver's license. Until you do, I'll move your off-topic posts somewhere else. We're not gonna play the sovereign language game, I just won't have it.

It can not be this hard for you legal eagles.

what statute issues drivers licenses?

CHAPTER 322
DRIVERS’ LICENSES

[Gregg]

322 covers licenses of different classes, the different sections address the nuances about all questions as to how, why and who needs what kind of license and minutia, it even has a section for what color they should be. Its pretty comprehensive, but law is like that. It also follows, in all law in general, that you cannot ignore another part of the statute to deny what a given part says. You can point out conflicts, you can point out things not specified but you can't say you want to know what part of 322.03 says this, because what ''this" is is addressed in another part of the law.

As I said, I'm not going to allow you to run willy nilly around the point, you can post a court citation that supports your argument, or you can quit wasting my time, becaue I'm not going to allow anything until you concede you're wrong or show a court that thinks you're right.

[Patriotdiscussions]

322 covers licenses of different classes, the different sections address the nuances about all questions as to how, why and who needs what kind of license and minutia, it even has a section for what color they should be. Its pretty comprehensive, but law is like that. It also follows, in all law in general, that you cannot ignore another part of the statute to deny what a given part says. You can point out conflicts, you can point out things not specified but you can't say you want to know what part of 322.03 says this, because what ''this" is is addressed in another part of the law.

As I said, I'm not going to allow you to run willy nilly around the point, you can post a court citation that supports your argument, or you can quit wasting my time, becaue I'm not going to allow anything until you concede you're wrong or show a court that thinks you're right.

What legislative act authorized the non commercial licenses?

[RSVPini]

I'm convinced that to become a sovereign and accept all of the laws that are misinterpreted by them, a person needs to have the (dis)ability to NOT recognize real evidence no matter how easily accessed and how often it is presented to him/her.

[Gregg]

The section of the law dealing with "driver's licenses" only deals with driver's licenses" and the court has so ruled many times, in regards to this and other statutes. A law that goes into minute detail about a given subject isn't dealing with multiple subjects, its dealing with the multiple aspects of one subject, in detail.

Arguement invalid.

Show me a court finding that supports your position, or go home, Sparky.

[NYGman]

1. An act of the legislature of the State of Florida can embrace only on subject; and,
2. Florida’s Constitution, Article 3, Section 6 says:
[Snip]

Sorry, that is all your opinion, and for what it is worth, it is wrong. You were asked to cite a case that supports your views, not restate your psuedolaw babble.

We don't want your analysis as it is wrong, and has no basis in the law. Show me a single case that argued your position, that succeeded on its merits. Just one, if you are right, this shold be easy to do. If there isn't one, please go to a police station and had then issue you a ticket, so you can take it to court, defend the appeal, and make some legal precedent. Until then, your opinion and analysis is worthless.

[RSVPini]

........Show me a single case that argued your position, that succeeded on its merits. Just one, if you are right, this shold be easy to do.....

There should be at least 50 different cases listed on google...

[Patriotdiscussions]

So basically you are saying that commercial driver licenses have an enactment, but non commercial drivers dont need an enactment OR that the non commercial license act is included in the commercial drivers license act.

Is that about right?