# 2 Tom  Demeter  lives  in the   Constitutional  Republic   and protected   FROM   the  government  by the   CONSTITUTION,   the  Law of the Land.

Tom Demeter separated himself from the corporation of the United States and all its subdivisions using the UCC process. He separated his enfranchised legal entity from his true living human being. He is a free being to "serve" God and a "creditor" to the corporation "the State," and not a "barrower," or "debtor." Demeter has no private contracts or licenses to participate in "privileged" activities, and did not pledged to support the debt of the bankrupt corporate United States, or its subdivisions.

Is there a LAW which requires private owners to record their "Household Good," their CAR, and private "personal affects," property an automobile? There is no law that requires any MSO's to automobiles or property rights appertaining thereto (use or possession), to be registered. "nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation" ( U.S. Constitution AMENDMENT ARTICLE V. ) unless "Purchased or Condemned for public use and owner/seller compensated therefore with consideration of value," (by the State.) The law provides that one may post to pledge his car as collateral for a debt payable and due to a State or political subdivision thereof. By voluntary placing ones "personal effects" private CAR into the "corporate records," (by registering it) it is presumed that this person is a DEBTOR to "the State." See "Who may be a debtor" 11 U.S. Code, Section 108.

The DMV had the "Title" (M.S.O. Manufacturer Statement of Origin) of the CAR. I asked the DMV to PAY for the car or to Release the title. They did not respond. The State and the DMV is in "default," (admit they don't owe the car). The State's presumption is that their "State corporation" has "an interest" in the CAR / automobile, and by it "they" control the CAR, the Ekklesia's private property, and the rights of "use," "possession," etc. and the Ekklesia must pay an annual fee (tax) in "return" for that benefit.

Some of the "benefits" of registering the CAR, to become a "vehicle" are; the privilege of applying to the government corporation, DMV for an "Annual Registration Tag" and "Driver Permit" to regulate and "control" my "USE" by "Regulations," Permits/Certificates," "Annual Inspections," and the compelled acceptance of government required "Insurance," and other government granted/compelled "benefits;" and the privilege of paying annual "Fees" to pay for them.

Why do "the State" corporation want the "registration"? The State besides generating "Fees," by having the Ekklesias' M.S.O. in its possession, "on Record," uses the Ekklesia's M.S.O. as an "asset," based on the false assumption that I pledged the Ekklesia's CAR as a collateral for the State's "Debt." Now the State use my M.S.O to barrow from the Federal Government, pledging my M.S.O. for the State's debt. This is fraud, of "unlawful conversion" of private property.

I Tom Demeter is the "Holder in Due Course" the Title under UCC of the CAR.

# 3 Tom Demeter is protected by the CODE to "obey" God's "laws,"

The Code's "remedy" for Tom Demeter to obey God is UCC 1-207. I do not own a "vehicle" and the car is not USED in any "Revenue-Taxable Activity" "Motoring" (or "as Motor-Carrier) at this moment" for (commerce).

1) God's Kingdom of the Godhead, its Embassy the Ekklesia owns the car and the Title not the Certificate of Title. The car is a "personal property"

2) The Car is not used in commercial "revenue Taxable Activity."

3) The Car is not volunteered into registration, to have jurisdiction over it.

People do not need a "LICENSE" if they are not enjoying a "revenue Taxable activity," as a CAR do not need a "license" and TAG if it is a private personal property.

US Code 1982 Edition Title 18 Crimes and Criminal Procedure Sec.31 Definitions "Motor vehicle" means every description of carriage or other contrivance propelled by mechanical power and used for commercial purposes on the highways in the transportation of passengers and property.

Statutes of California Constitution of 1879 Chapter 412, Section 1(b) The word "operator" shall include all persons, forms associations and corporations who operate motor vehicles upon any public "highway" (it is an interesting legal question how were our roads legally converted to "highways") in this state and thereby engage in the transportation of persons or property for HIRE or COMPENSATION, but shall not include any person, firm, association or corporation who solely transports by motor vehicle persons to and from or to or from attendance upon any public school or who solely transports his own property, employees, or both, and who transport no person or property for hire or compensation, Ö

Chapter 415 Sec. 311 The licensee shall have his or her operator's or chauffeur's license, or the receipt described in section 311a, In his or her immediate possession at all times when operating a motor vehicle, and shall display the same upon demand of any police officer, who shall identify himself or herself as such. (NOT if you are not a licensee)

The Motor Vehicle Code does not identify the term "licensee." A court concluded that a "licensee" is one who has a valid operator's or chauffeur's license. MICHIGAN vs. STEPHEN L TURNER.

CASE # 1: "The use of the highway for the purpose of travel and transportation is not a mere privilege, but a common fundamental right of which the public and individuals cannot rightfully be deprived." Chicago Motor Coach v. Chicago, 169 NE 221.

CASE #2: "The right of the citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, either by carriage or by automobile, is not a mere privilege which a city may prohibit or permit at will, but a common law right which he has under the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." Thompson V. Smith, 154 SE 579.

It must be stated that citizens of the states have a common law right to travel, without approval or restiction (license), and that this right is protected under the U.S. Constitution.

CASE # 3: "The right to travel is a part of the liberty of which the citizen cannot be deprived without due process of law under the Fifth Amendment." Kent v. Dulles, 357 US 116,125.

CASE # 4: "The right to travel is a well-established common right that does not owe its existence to the federal government. It is recognized by the courts as a natural right." Schactman v. Dulles 96 App DC 287, 225 F2d 938, at 941.

CASE # 5: "The state cannot diminish rights of the people" Hertado v. California, 110 US 516,the U.S. Supreme Court.

CASE # 6: "Statutes that violate the plain and obvious principles of common right and common reason are null and void." Bennet v. Boggs, 1 Baldw 50.

CASE #7: "The assertion of federal rights, when plainly and reasonably made, is not to be defeated under the name of local practice." Davis v. Wechsler, 263 US 22, at 24.

CASE #8: "Where   rights  secured  by the  Constitution,  there can be  No  rulemaking  or  legislation  which would  abrogate  them" Miranda v. Arizone, 384 US 436, 491.

CASE #9: "The claim and exercise of a constitutional right cannot be converted into a crime." Miller v. Us, 230 F 486, at 489.

CASE #10: "There can be no sanction or penalty imposed upon one because of this exercise of constitutional rights." Sherer v. Cullen, 481 F 946

Can a government legally put restrictions on the rights of the American people at any time, for any reason? Article Six of the U.S. Constitution: "This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof : Ö shall be the SUPREME Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any thing in the Constitution or laws of any State to the Contrary not one word withstanding."

Who are bound by the Supreme Law: "The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmations, to support this Constitution Ö"

It is a felony and federal crime to violate or deprive citizens of their Constitutionally protected rights.

There is only two ways to legally remove a right belonging to the people. (1) lawfully amending the Constitution, or (2) by a person knowingly waiving a particular right.

It is sad that millions have "waived" their "right" to travel unrestricted and volunteered into the jurisdiction of the state. (Corporation) and knowingly given up these "rights" are now legally regulated by the State ( a corporation) law and must require the proper permits and registrations.

CASE # 11: "... For while a citizen has the right to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, that right does not extend to the use of the highways Ö as a place of private gain (Hire). For the latter purpose, no person has a vested right to use the highways of this state, but it is a privilege Ö which the (the corporate State) may grant or withhold at its discretion Ö" State v. Johnson, 245 P 1073.

People lose their "right" by knowingly, or voluntarily waive their right. Why did people waive their right? They did because they did not receive "full disclosure" for their actions.

U.S. Supreme Court Bans Searches In Traffic Cases: The officer searched the vehicle without the authorization of suspect. Renquist said: "The search was authorized by the state law, but nonetheless violated the constitutional guarantee under the Fourth Amendment protecting privacy rights and guarding against unreasonable searches and seizures of evidence. Searches have been allowed when a suspect has been arrested because of concerns of officer safety and because of the need to discover and preserve evidence. These two conditions do not apply to traffic citations.