Tips/Experiences for dealing with "traffic" stops

[Florida Man]

Seems as if this section could use some up-to-date postings about traveling in a private capacity upon public roadways, and what to do if you are accosted by a policy enforcer.

My suggestions:

1) Statutes are based upon jurisdiction, and require consent. You consent by admitting to being a subject and/or by maintaining a "vehicle registration" or "drivers license". So the first step is to get rid of your vehicle registration and understand that it is NOT a vehicle, but your private property.

2) Remove the "license plate" and replace it with something, or nothing at all. Personally, I'd suggest getting a custom plate off ebay that appears to be similar to a state-issued plate...but if asked about it, it is simply a decoration/accessory for your private property. DO NOT call it a license plate because it is not.

3) It is probably a good idea to cover the chassis identification codes "VIN" numbers commonly located on the inside of the left-front door jamb and on the bottom-left of the windshield.

4) You do not need to identify yourself to the policy enforcer, nor do you need to speak much. I would suggest limiting the dialog to the following statements:

"I am not for hire, and I am not a citizen or resident of this state or the united states."
(Why: Establishes that you are not participiting in a regulatable activity AND you are not in their jurisdiction)

"This is not a vehicle, this is my private property."
(Why: Establishes that your car, truck, motorcycle, or whatever means of mobility is PROPERTY and thus subject to the processes outlined by the 4th and 5th amendment of the Constitution; if they break your windows after doing this, you have a very good reason to sue both the policy enforcer and the entire force for criminal violations in common law)

"I will not identify myself unless I am being suspected of a crime."
(Why: All statutory jurisdictions require your consent, no matter how little, for them to proceed with charges against you. As a non-driver, and not-for-hire, non-citizen, non-resident you have absolutely ZERO obligation to ID yourself at a traffic stop)

If they say: "Please step out of the vehicle" then DON'T because you ARE NOT in a vehicle.
Respond by saying, "I will not abandon my private property."
(Why: If you step out of the vehicle, you are acknowledging that it is a "vehicle" and thus subject to statutory jurisdiction. Assert that it is your private property and do not exit it. If you are on a motorcycle, do not dismount.)

You need not say anything else and do not show them anything. Do not engage in small talk. Do not volunteer ANY information, and DO NOT agree with or "understand" anything they may suggest to you. Keep your doors locked and your window opened enough to speak, but not enough to give the donut gobbler a clear view into your car or truck.

They may detain you for a while, but as long as you do not ID yourself (and you do not have to regardless of what any statutes say) they cannot manufacture a controversy against you and charge you with anything.

If you are arrested, never ID yourself and do not submit to fingerprints or fill out any forms. Why should you? The entire "show" is designed to intimidate you into consenting to their jurisdiction. At most, demand a verified complaint and nothing more. Eventually they will have to let you go.

[lorne]

I was reading an account written by a guy in Nevada after an accident in the 70s.

The Highway Patrol came out about 30 minutes after the accident and left, offering no aid. He came back several hours later with a tow truck from some local company which hooked up my car and left. The Highway Patrol officer wrote me a ticket for illegal exit of the roadway (no other car was involved), with an order to appear in person at the local courthouse, not pay the ticket via mail.

https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-cruelest-thing-that-happened-to-you-waiting-for-a-tow-truck

Long story short, his grandfather discovered that the Highway Patrol in that area was colluding with a local impound, tow truck company and local judge to scam people involved in breakdowns and accidents in the area.

So you have two public employees in collusion with a tow truck company, scamming the public. What if similar criminal minds discovered a way to scam a larger number of people - say the whole state - using the apparatus of government? Who is to stop them?

[Florida Man]

So you have two public employees in collusion with a tow truck company, scamming the public. What if similar criminal minds discovered a way to scam a larger number of people - say the whole state - using the apparatus of government? Who is to stop them?

Well, from their perspective it is like a joint venture: "We'll detain them, you tow their property. We split the take."

The only thing that can stop them is our awareness of their scam, and our willingness to make a firm assertion of our unalienable rights without submitting or consenting to their jurisdiction (often in the face of much intimidation).

As an example, I presume that most people on this board understand that the "Federal Reserve" is in fact a foreign-owned private bank that is deceptively named in a way that suggests it is part of the American federal government. What few people realize is that same deceptive naming has been applied to various unincorporated entities.

For instance:

State of Florida = unincorporated
> Florida State = corporate
> STATE OF FLORIDA = corporate

united States of America = unincorporated
> United States = corporate
> UNITED STATES = corporate
> UNITED STATES OF AMERICA = corporate

County of Someplace = unincorporated
> Someplace County = corporate
> COUNTY OF SOMEPLACE = corporate

corporate = statutory = legal = consensual
unincorporated = law [of the land] = lawful = always in force

So it's very easy to be snared in their trap of statutory jurisdiction, which is why you see many videos of purported 'sovereigns' failing when they start talking a lot and rattling off case citiations, claims, and theories.

The only real rule is that any living man or woman needs to know is that they must ensure that the burden of proof is always upon the accuser. This is most effectively done by remaining silent (i.e. not incriminating yourself by blabbing or volunteering info), and when appropriate, responding with simple direct statements. If they make a statement to you or about you, you may opt to respond with a question about how they arrived at their conclusion.

[David Merrill]

The right to travel doctrine is non-productive. Been there. Done that.

[Michael Joseph]

Take a look at the entire series called JERICO on Netflix. Read between the lines.

[xparte]

https://youtu.be/hW9cCWm53H4 The Fugs

[lorne]

I recall the parking ticket I refused for cause way back when. The city sent a letter in response (R4C'd) that told of the bad things that may happen if I didn't pay or attend a hearing:



I did neither. I can still look up the ticket online, five years later. None of the bad things threatened have happened; I've renewed the DL and vehicle registration with no issues. It's like the ticket has a special status; non-standard - with no consequences if not paid.

[David Merrill]

Attorneys seem the first to understand the right of refusal. I recall how one attorney educated me, initially when I wanted to renege on an expensive vacuum cleaner purchase. I recall also how he pushy salesman cut the cord on our old vacuum! Can you believe I would subject myself to that?

The attorney just bounced around on Friday, with me getting nowhere in our conversation about returning the vacuum. On Tuesday he called me and said, "You have had the vacuum for three days and the sale is final!"

[EZrhythm]

It appears Florida Man doesn't have much experience with traffic stops. His "tips" indicate "beginner" thinking on the subject and are missing some crucial information and some are just outright bad advise.

[David Merrill]

Indeed Florida Man has been studying. It is amazing how the Internet will teach the same lessons over and over for decades.

Gold is a great medium of communication whether in highward state manna (starfire) or server farms and data silos. It will teach us anything, gold.

[xparte]

On refusing for cause seems like a challenge to the Clerk now by simply declining the offer to pay or plea to the ticket It says on or before a date your allowed to plead guilty and pay before its in the system they still must wait 3 to balance the books bank entered credit like the Montana Freeman suggested way back when Its a interesting situation when the municipal police chief sends a letter begging your attention on the ticket matter I reason its because the clerk cant dock a complaint for non appearance a parking ticket wouldn't be any different in losing DRIVING privileges if unpaid but your just not getting a bench warrant for non appearance so both matters can be declined in a proper refusal notice And yes its worked for me also lorne just revisions in the verbiage a ticket violation is a valued offer $ amount settlement. Facing criminal charges and prints and that promise to appear signature thats just being forced to act like a driver and a defendant a R4C can be filed but the case will never be docked. But my repository states i havent had my day in court.