Building without a permit, driving without a license: The Tom Hyland Lifestyle

[loveunderlaw]

Adam sits down with Tom Hyland to get his incredible story of asserting his freedom of movement (driving without a license or registration) in a house that he built himself without a permit.

[allodial]

I know of someone that went through a similar situation. Judge insisted that he get a license. He went and tried to get one without an SSN, etc, etc (he lacked an SSN). The DMV said he was ineligible. The judge was shown this said replied "Why didn't you tell me that you were ineligible?"

[EZrhythm]

I remember you sharing that instance a long long time ago on a forum far far away.

[walter]

you need a SSN for a DL in the states?
not in canada,
you need their issued ID for a DL. the BC.
funny thing is the BC is not meant as ID.

[allodial]

you need a SSN for a DL in the states?
not in canada,
you need their issued ID for a DL. the BC.
funny thing is the BC is not meant as ID.

The BC identifies the estate. Passport, Driver licenses, State ID identifies the fiduciary. If you don't have a BC or an SSN then you are ineligible. If you dont have a BC in Canada then you tell them that and have them put it in writing that you are ineligible. Alternatively, you can use family birth records or family bible birth entries (certified copy). Lacking residence in the States I am ineligible according to all of the DMVs that I know of--they only issue driver's licenses to residents.

I remember you sharing that instance a long long time ago on a forum far far away.

Ah the nostalgia.

[walter]

Civil Code of Québec

SECTION II
USE OF NAME

55. Every person has a right to the respect of his name.

He may use one or more of the given names stated in his act of birth.

1991, c. 64, a. 55.

56. A person who uses a name other than his or her own is liable for any resulting confusion or injury.

The holder of a name as well as his or her married or civil union spouse or close relatives may object to such use and demand redress for the injury caused.

1991, c. 64, a. 56; 2002, c. 6, s. 2; I.N. 2014-05-01.



ineligible because we don't have a last NAME.

[allodial]

Civil Code of Québec

SECTION II
USE OF NAME

55. Every person has a right to the respect of his name.

He may use one or more of the given names stated in his act of birth.

1991, c. 64, a. 55.

56. A person who uses a name other than his or her own is liable for any resulting confusion or injury.

The holder of a name as well as his or her married or civil union spouse or close relatives may object to such use and demand redress for the injury caused.

1991, c. 64, a. 56; 2002, c. 6, s. 2; I.N. 2014-05-01.



ineligible because we don't have a last NAME.

Applies to "persons" or "parishioners"? Isn't Quebec a Napoleonic Code jurisdiction?

[BLBereans]

Is not man unlimited in capacity? If a man chooses, a man may act in person, or not, depending upon whether a man decides it is a benefit to do so or not.

Likewise, a man may choose to operate under a license (or in office) or not. Is a cop called "Officer Smith" when he returns home to his or her family even tough he or she may still be wearing the uniform?



"License and Registration"

"I do not understand; I am a man, with my property, going from point A to point B"

"This car has license plates on it"

"It also has windshield wipers on it, however, I'm not using those right now either."

"License and Registration"

"Is that an order?"

"Yes"

"Are you authorized to handle State property?

"Yes"

"Then here you go, these are essentially yours anyway"

"Here is your citation, blah, blah, blah..."

"Thank you; remember that I will call on your witness testimony, if necessary."

The rest is a matter of whether one is able to still be a man leading up to and while in court (if necessary) and remain in that capacity throughout the process. If not, you will lose.

[EZrhythm]

Why go through that dialog when you could have this one?

"Papers please."

"There are no papers, the title has been "junked"."

"Don't you think you need to have registration?"

"No, not while going to the store."

"Are you one of those who doesn't believe you need to be registered?"

"No. Not while going to the store."

"OK, I won't f#&k with you. Have a nice day."

-True story. Plate displayed at the time stated, "PRIVATE PROPERTY - CONSUMER GOODS - NO LICENSE REQUIRED"

[loveunderlaw]

Why go through that dialog when you could have this one?

"Papers please."

"There are no papers, the title has been "junked"."

"Don't you think you need to have registration?"

"No, not while going to the store."

"Are you one of those who doesn't believe you need to be registered?"

"No. Not while going to the store."

"OK, I won't f#&k with you. Have a nice day."

-True story. Plate displayed at the time stated, "PRIVATE PROPERTY - CONSUMER GOODS - NO LICENSE REQUIRED"

I love this approach, it works every time And if your rights are violated , then you've got a sure win in court.