Keeping your Rights while traveling the roadways.

If you have visited the Basic Education section, perhaps now you have a better understanding of why we offer privately issued (non-corporate) documents. Natural born Americans never knowingly consented to being under the jurisdiction of the bankrupted government corporations and there is no law saying we have to accept their "privileges".

You can be sure that the officer who detains you on the road is unaware of the jurisdictional conflict concerning your Rights and it would not be wise to attempt educating him or her on the spot, that is why we offer documents that do the talking for you.

For many years, freedom-loving travelers used the International Driver Permit ("IDP") as a way around the jurisdictional issue because usually the officer will send you on your way once s/he understands that you are simply passing through and are not subject to that jurisdiction. The Roadway Report linked to below discusses how to best complete the Application for an IDP and how to use it in your travels.

Alternatively, if you understand your Rights and have the confidence to 'hold your own', you may want to consider the Writ to Travel and/or the International Motorist Qualification ("IMQ"). It is a powerful package that only the most ignorant officer would disregard. If you happen to run into "Officer Ignorant", and s/he issues a citation, it can usually be easily disposed of if you have educated yourself on conducting yourself as a Secured Party Creditor or a sovereign.

The bottom line here is that there is no easy way to exercise your Rights. You need to make the decision to educate yourself or just follow the dictates of those in power.

From "Things that are NOT in the U.S. Constitution" at
http://www.usconstitution.net/constnot.html :

The Right To Travel

As the Supreme Court notes in Saenz v Roe, 98-97 (1999), the Constitution does not contain the word "travel" in any context, let alone an explicit right to travel (except for members of Congress, who are guaranteed the right to travel to and from Congress). 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." It is interesting to note that the Articles of Confederation had an explicit right to travel; it is now thought that the right is so fundamental that the Framers may have thought it unnecessary to include it in the Constitution or the Bill of Rights.
Thanks to Marko Liias for the idea. Thanks to W.H. van Atteveldt for the note about Congressional travel.