Driver Licensing not about highway safety

proffsl wrote:

Driver Licensing serves no purpose for highway safety that laws
against endangerment did not already serve, and instead only serves
fiscal greed.

Our public highways were built on our property with our money for the
purpose of enhancing and increasing the exercise of our Right of
Locomotion ordinarily used for personal travel. But, the more our
public highways are made unusable by anything but the automobile, the
more this LIE that Driving is a privilege makes us all prisoners of
privilege behind bars lf blacktop.


Yes yes yes. We get it. You are a silly little troll who keeps posting the
same nonsense over and over and over.

On Oct 3, 6:20 pm, proffsl wrote:
Driver Licensing is essential for highway safety.

Our public highways were built on our property with our money for the
purpose of enhancing and increasing the exercise of our Right of
Locomotion ordinarily used for personal travel. Therefore, licensing is
a properly adjudicated element in our system of enforcing the
constitutional mandate for preserving public welfare and safety. I
should have seen this so clearly much earlier but it took awhile for
the nice Mr. Flynn to open my eyes.

Read about it at:http://proffsl.0mb.com/makes_public_apology.php

I fixed your post.

"proffsl" wrote in message
ps.com...
Driver Licensing serves no purpose for highway safety that laws
against endangerment did not already serve, and instead only serves
fiscal greed.


Study the booklet a little harder and maybe you can pass the test next time.
Or did you lose your license because you neglected too often to follow the
instructions in the book? If greed were the motive for issuing driver
licenses, then they'd cost as much as license plates and registration with
the exception of Oregon. KM
--
(-:alohacyberian:-) At my website view over 3,600 live cameras or
visit NASA, the Vatican, the Smithsonian, the Louvre, CIA, FBI, and
NBA, the White House, Academy Awards, 150 language translators!
Visit Hawaii, Israel and more at: http://keith.martin.home.att.net/

"Dave Smith" wrote in message
...
proffsl wrote:
Driver Licensing serves no purpose for highway safety that laws
against endangerment did not already serve, and instead only serves
fiscal greed.

Yes yes yes. We get it. You are a silly little troll who keeps posting the
same nonsense over and over and over.

Maybe someone told him if he keeps posting the same rant, eventually he'll
win a driver license. ;-) KM
--
(-:alohacyberian:-) At my website view over 3,600 live cameras or
visit NASA, the Vatican, the Smithsonian, the Louvre, CIA, FBI, and
NBA, the White House, Academy Awards, 150 language translators!
Visit Hawaii, Israel and more at: http://keith.martin.home.att.net/

Alohacyberian wrote:



Yes yes yes. We get it. You are a silly little troll who keeps posting the
same nonsense over and over and over.

Maybe someone told him if he keeps posting the same rant, eventually he'll
win a driver license. ;-) KM


Yeah, that about sums it up. He apparently has some sort of issue with the
driver examination process in his jurisdiction and thinks that bringing up
the same flawed logic and non-supporting evidence is going to get him
behind a steering wheel.

Dave Smith wrote:
proffsl wrote:

Driver Licensing serves no purpose for highway safety that laws
against endangerment did not already serve, and instead only serves
fiscal greed.

Our public highways were built on our property with our money for
the purpose of enhancing and increasing the exercise of our Right
of Locomotion ordinarily used for personal travel. But, the more our
public highways are made unusable by anything but the automobile,
the more this LIE that Driving is a privilege makes us all prisoners of
privilege behind bars lf blacktop.

Yes yes yes. We get it. You are a silly little troll who keeps posting the
same nonsense over and over and over.

Dave, Dave, Dave. Do you really wish me to speak of how you are
suffering from a tiny and closed mind that is incapable of thought
outside the tiny dark box it has been imprisoned in? You had one post
earlier, about that German city thinking of re-thinking how they
accomplish highway safety, that indicated you might, just might, be
able to think outside that tiny box, but now you retreat back into the
dark corners of that box. I have no idea what you think you accomplish
with your personal attacks. They bead off me like water on a hot waxed
hood. If you want to try to convince me I'm wrong, you'll have to do
better than show your own stupidity and ignorance. K_flynn ought to
have enough of that for everyone.

"Alohacyberian" wrote:
"proffsl" wrote in message

Driver Licensing serves no purpose for highway safety that
laws against endangerment did not already serve, and instead
only serves fiscal greed.

Study the booklet a little harder and maybe you can pass the test
next time. Or did you lose your license because you neglected too
often to follow the instructions in the book?

Do you believe you impress anyone with your ability to spew personal
attacks? People who resort to personal attacks prove only one thing.
That being that they have nothing intelligent to say.

Dave Smith wrote:
Alohacyberian wrote:

Maybe someone told him if he keeps posting the same rant,
eventually he'll win a driver license. ;-)

Yeah, that about sums it up. He apparently has some sort of issue
with the driver examination process in his jurisdiction and thinks
that bringing up the same flawed logic and non-supporting evidence
is going to get him behind a steering wheel.

I see you too would like to lower yourself to personal attacks,
instead of addressing the points of the issue like an intelligent
person. Well, if you must resort to personal attacks, how about you
making it worth my time and you putting your money where your mouth
is, Dave? Let's say $40,000. No? I didn't figure so.

If you change your mind, place $40,000 on deposit with a lawyer of
your choosing. Inform me when you have done so, and as to the name and
number of that lawyer. I will verify your money is on deposit with
that lawyer, and then I will do the same. Then, our two lawyers will
verify each other credibility. Then, they will verify the credibility
of your accusations above. If your accusations have no credibility,
your lawyer will send my lawyer your money.

I won't be holding my breath waiting to hear from you that you accept
this challenge and have decided to put your money where your mouth
is. I highly suspect you're nothing more than a cheap shot mealy
mouth asshole.

Which pretty much also catagorizes the rest of your opinions.

On Oct 4, 3:53 pm, proffsl wrote:
Dave Smith wrote:
proffsl wrote:

Driver Licensing serves no purpose for highway safety that laws
against endangerment did not already serve, and instead only serves
fiscal greed.

Our public highways were built on our property with our money for
the purpose of enhancing and increasing the exercise of our Right
of Locomotion ordinarily used for personal travel. But, the more our
public highways are made unusable by anything but the automobile,
the more this LIE that Driving is a privilege makes us all prisoners of
privilege behind bars lf blacktop.

Yes yes yes. We get it. You are a silly little troll who keeps posting the
same nonsense over and over and over.

Dave, Dave, Dave. Do you really wish me to speak of how you are
suffering from a tiny and closed mind that is incapable of thought
outside the tiny dark box it has been imprisoned in? You had one post
earlier, about that German city thinking of re-thinking how they
accomplish highway safety, that indicated you might, just might, be
able to think outside that tiny box, but now you retreat back into the
dark corners of that box. I have no idea what you think you accomplish
with your personal attacks. They bead off me like water on a hot waxed
hood. If you want to try to convince me I'm wrong, you'll have to do
better than show your own stupidity and ignorance. K_flynn ought to
have enough of that for everyone.

Proffs, Proffs, Proffs! C'mon now! After all that teaching I did for
you, proving how your premises were off and your logic was skewed and
how I completely dismantled all your arguments, even before you had to
resort to fabricating a court case in a futile attempt to support your
claims, you have the temerity to suggest *I* am the ignorant one here?
I suggest you could benefit by re-reading the thread from last year
and learn how to approach your issue. Like I said, I could support you
in that -- I agree that we might be able to find a way to achieve the
same ends without licensing, but your contention that the current
system is illegal and unconstitutional and a lie and a konspiracy is
just wrong.

On Oct 4, 4:04 pm, proffsl wrote:
"Alohacyberian" wrote:
"proffsl" wrote in message

Driver Licensing serves no purpose for highway safety that
laws against endangerment did not already serve, and instead
only serves fiscal greed.

Study the booklet a little harder and maybe you can pass the test
next time. Or did you lose your license because you neglected too
often to follow the instructions in the book?

Do you believe you impress anyone with your ability to spew personal
attacks? People who resort to personal attacks prove only one thing.
That being that they have nothing intelligent to say.

I agree. Proof of that is when you started them last year. It showed
the paucity of your argument!