Vehicle registration is unjust tax.

reply to post by steppenwolf86


I pay a state and city tax no? I see it come out of my check every pay day? Confiscated money gets put back into the police force that's how the border patrol is paid for, same with the auto auction the police have when they steal cars from the side of the road. You have to pay a fortune to get it back or they sell it. They also sell confiscated property and what not. They make a killing. Our problem is the money is used so in effectively that they must keep adding taxes to pay for what's already in place.

reply to post by dorkfish87


I walk whenever I can. But why do you need to save money on taxes by walking. Once you own the car it's yours. I'm all for charging a bit to put tags and title in new owners name but not $2500+ in same cases and not every year.

reply to post by marbles87


I'm sorry I may have worded myself wrongly.

My reasoning for walking to get places isn't to save money, that's just a nice plus.
I walk everywhere because I've seen firsthand what technology can do to people when it's taken for granted.

People drive to the gym, sit in rush hour traffic at times, to walk on a treadmill
Some people wouldn't walk half a city block to go to the grocery store.
And I'm in killer shape, my calves look like they swallowed grape fruits

reply to post by marbles87


Registering your car with the government makes it their car. You are given a 'title of ownership' not the same thing as the manufacturer's deed.

en.wikipedia.org...

While not standardized from state to state, or province to province the certificate of title normally specifies: Identifying information about the vehicle, normally at minimum its vehicle identification number, make, and year of manufacture. The license plate number. Technical information about the vehicle to define its taxation regime, e.g., its gross vehicle weight, motive power, and purchase price when new. The name and address of the purchaser or "registered owner" who would normally possess and use it. If money is owed on the vehicle, the name of the lienholder or "legal owner" to whom this money is owed.

If the vehicle you are purchasing is a commercial motor vehicle, you may be required to complete a REG 4008 indicating the gross vehicle weight (GVWR) or combined gross vehicle weight (CGVWR) at which your vehicle will be operated.

www.dmv.ca.gov...

You are registering commercial motor vehicles which is how the federal government forces you to get a drivers license, as a drivers license only applies to operators of commercial motor vehicles..



Blacks Law Dictionary ^^

reply to post by VeritasAequitas


It's a shame. What would you call that when the goverment owns everything. Oh yeah communism.

As I was reading the OP, my first thought was the fees go towards the upkeep of our local and state roadways. Now I don't have a problem with that because I'm putting in my fair share of tearing up our roads constantly.
Then when you stated that our income tax pays for that (without a link for verification) I decided to do some checking on my own. I live in New Mexico and getting around our government pages is almost cryptic, so I started with "Vehicle registration fees" which led me to state taxation. After seeing where the fees go, just from our vehicles and other related fees(ie- DL,late penalties,etc), it is no wonder why or government finances are so screwed up. Here's just a few out of dozens of pockets that recieve our money-

66-6-23. Disposition of fees. (2012)

A. After the necessary disbursements for refunds and other purposes have been made, the money remaining in the motor vehicle suspense fund , except for remittances received within the previous two months that are unidentified as to source or disposition, shall be distributed as follows:

to each municipality or county,
to the state road fund
to each municipality, county or fee agent operating a motor vehicle field office
to each military installation
local governments road fund
to the department
department for the manufacture and issuance of a special registration plate
enforcing the provisions of the Mandatory Financial Responsibility Act
defraying the costs of maintaining databases of motor vehicle-related records of the department
to each New Mexico institution of higher education,
armed forces veterans license fund
children's trust fund
department of transportation
to the state equalization guarantee distribution
motorcycle training fund
to the recycling and illegal dumping fund
to the litter control and beautification fund
to the local government division of the department of finance and administration
to the Cumbres and Toltec scenic railroad commission
highway infrastructure fund

www.nmonesource.com...

Now I know that there is some double dipping go on here just from registering your vehicle. I want to check some other "simple taxes and fees" to see where they go. So as far as your income tax paying for the roadways, I have no doubt that it does and who knows what else.

Well they do have the right of imminent domain, so they could technically take your home whenever they wanted to, even if they were going to turn around and sell it for a profit. Happens more than we would think.


I also recall an executive order last year giving the government the right to seize and redistribute any and all resources in an emergency situation

"Travel is not a privilege that can be permitted at will with forced insurances, registration, and licensing, but a common and fundamental right of liberty granted by the Constitution." - Chicago Coach Co. Vs City of Chicago.

Under all state statues, for the definition of "highway", it states it is open to the public as a matter of Right.

AUTOMOBILE AND MOTOR VEHICLE There is a clear distinction between an automobile and a motor vehicle. An automobile has been defined as: "The word `automobile' connotes a pleasure vehicle designed for the transportation of persons on highways." American Mutual Liability Ins. Co., vs. Chaput, 60 A.2d 118, 120; 95 NH 200 While the distinction is made clear between the two as the courts have stated: "A motor vehicle or automobile for hire is a motor vehicle, other than an automobile stage, used for the transportation of persons for which remuneration is received." International Motor Transit Co. vs. Seattle, 251 P. 120 The term `motor vehicle' is different and broader than the word `automobile.'" City of Dayton vs. DeBrosse, 23 NE.2d 647, 650; 62 Ohio App. 232 The distinction is made very clear in Title 18 USC 31: "Motor vehicle" means every description or other contrivance propelled or drawn by mechanical power and used for commercial purposes on the highways in the transportation of passengers, or passengers and property. "Used for commercial purposes" means the carriage of persons or property for any fare, fee, rate, charge or other considerations, or directly or indirectly in connection with any business, or other undertaking intended for profit. Clearly, an automobile is private property in use for private purposes, while a motor vehicle is a machine which may be used upon the highways for trade, commerce, or hire.

TRAVEL The term "travel" is a significant term and is defined as: "The term `travel' and `traveler' are usually construed in their broad and general sense ... so as to include all those who rightfully use the highways viatically (when being reimbursed for expenses) and who have occasion to pass over them for the purpose of business, convenience, or pleasure." 25 Am.Jur. (1st) Highways, Sect.427, Pg. 717 "Traveler -- One who passes from place to place, whether for pleasure,instruction, business, or health." Locket vs. State, 47 Ala. 45; Bovier's Law Dictionary, 1914 ed., Pg. 3309 "Travel -- To journey or to pass through or over; as a country district, road, etc. To go from one place to another, whether on foot, or horseback, or in any conveyance as a train, an automobile, carriage, ship, or aircraft; Make a journey." Century Dictionary, Pg. 2034 Therefore, the term "travel" or "traveler" refers to one who uses a conveyance to go from one place to another, and included all those who use the highways as a matter of Right. Notice that in all these definitions, the phrase "for hire" never occurs. This term "travel" or "traveler" implies, by definition, one who uses the road as a means to move from one place to another. Therefore, one who uses the road in the ordinary course of life and business for the purpose of travel and transportation is a traveler.

DRIVER The term "driver" in contradistinction to "traveler," is defined as: "Driver -- One employed in conducting a coach, carriage, wagon, or other vehicle ..." Bovier's Law Dictionary, 1914 ed., Pg. 940 Notice that this definition includes one who is "employed" in conducting a vehicle. It should be self-evident that this individual could not be "traveling" on a journey, but is using the road as a place of business.

OPERATOR Today we assume that a "traveler" is a "driver," and a "driver" is an "operator." However, this is not the case. "It will be observed from the language of the ordinance that a distinction is to be drawn between the terms `operator' and `driver'; the `operator' of the service car being the person who is licensed to have the car on the streets in the business of carrying passengers for hire; while the `driver' is the one who actually drives the car. However, in the actual prosecution of business, it was possible for the same person to be both `operator' and `driver.'" Newbill vs. Union Indemnity Co., 60 SE.2d 658 To further clarify the definition of an "operator" the court observed that this was a vehicle "for hire" and that it was in the business of carrying passengers. This definition would seem to describe a person who is using the road as a place of business, or in other words, a person engaged in the "privilege" of using the road for gain. This definition, then, is a further clarification of the distinction mentioned earlier, and therefore: Traveling upon and transporting one's property upon the public roads as a matter of Right meets the definition of a traveler. Using the road as a place of business as a matter of privilege meets the definition of a driver or an operator or both.

TRAFFIC Having defined the terms "automobile," "motor vehicle," "traveler," "driver," and "operator," the next term to define is "traffic": "... Traffic thereon is to some extent destructive, therefore, the prevention of unnecessary duplication of auto transportation service will lengthen the life of the highways or reduce the cost of maintenance, the revenue derived by the state ... will also tend toward the public welfare by producing at the expense of those operating for private gain, some small part of the cost of repairing the wear ..." Northern Pacific R.R. Co. vs. Schoenfeldt, 213 P. 26 Note: In the above, Justice Tolman expounded upon the key of raising revenue by taxing the "privilege" to use the public roads "at the expense of those operating for gain." In this case, the word "traffic" is used in conjunction with the unnecessary Auto Transportation Service, or in other words, "vehicles for hire." The word "traffic" is another word which is to be strictly construed to the conducting of business. "Traffic -- Commerce, trade, sale or exchange of merchandise, bills, money, or the like. The passing of goods and commodities from one person to another for an equivalent in goods or money ..." Bovier's Law Dictionary, 1914 ed., Pg. 3307 Here again, notice that this definition refers to one "conducting business." No mention is made of one who is traveling in his automobile. This definition is of one who is engaged in the passing of a commodity or goods in exchange for money, i.e .., vehicles for hire. Furthermore, the word "traffic" and "travel" must have different meanings which the courts recognize. The difference is recognized in Ex Parte Dickey, supra: "...in addition to this, cabs, hackney coaches, omnibuses, taxicabs, and hacks, when unnecessarily numerous, interfere with the ordinary traffic and travel and obstruct them." The court, by using both terms, signified its recognition of a distinction between the two. But, what was the distinction? We have already defined both terms, but to clear up any doubt: "The word `traffic' is manifestly used here in secondary sense, and has reference to the business of transportation rather than to its primary meaning of interchange of commodities." Allen vs. City of Bellingham, 163 P. 18 Here the Supreme Court of the State of Washington has defined the word "traffic" (in either it's primary or secondary sense) in reference to business, and not to mere travel! So it is clear that the term "traffic" is business related and therefore, it is a "privilege." The net result being that "traffic" is brought under the (police) power of the legislature. The term has no application to one who is not using the roads as a place of business.

LICENSE It seems only proper to define the word "license," as the definition of this word will be extremely important in understanding the statutes as they are properly applied: "The permission, by competent authority to do an act which without permission, would be illegal, a trespass, or a tort." People vs. Henderson, 218 NW.2d 2, 4 "Leave to do a thing which licensor could prevent." Western Electric Co. vs. Pacent Reproducer Corp., 42 F.2d 116, 118 In order for these two definitions to apply in this case, the state would have to take up the position that the exercise of a Constitutional Right to use the public roads in the ordinary course of life and business is illegal, a trespass, or a tort, which the state could then regulate or prevent. This position, however, would raise magnitudinous Constitutional questions as this position would be diametrically opposed to fundamental Constitutional Law. (See "Conversion of a Right to a Crime," infra.) In the instant case, the proper definition of a "license" is: "a permit, granted by an appropriate governmental body, generally for consideration, to a person, firm, or corporation, to pursue some occupation or to carry on some business which is subject to regulation under the police power." Rosenblatt vs. California State Board of Pharmacy, 158 P.2d 199, 203 This definition would fall more in line with the "privilege" of carrying on business on the streets. Most people tend to think that "licensing" is imposed by the state for the purpose of raising revenue, yet there may well be more subtle reasons contemplated; for when one seeks permission from someone to do something he invokes the jurisdiction of the "licensor" which, in this case, is the state. In essence, the licensee may well be seeking to be regulated by the "licensor." "A license fee is a charge made primarily for regulation, with the fee to cover costs and expenses of supervision or regulation." State vs. Jackson, 60 Wisc.2d 700; 211 NW.2d 480, 487

reply to post by dorkfish87


Call martial law. Take property and sell to pay debts. Financial crisis is a crisis.

To above above. The goverment has no idea where tax money goes they just take it from wherever there's an account in the black. Imagine how much we could save if we just organized our finances in this country.

reply to post by VeritasAequitas


I don't understAnd the Chicago vs chicago.

reply to post by marbles87


They can't take a fundamental right to travel, and restrict it to a privilege by requiring a license, which is a revokable permission to do something that would otherwise be illegal. Common law protects you and everybody else in the event of a careless driver....So therefore requiring licenses which are meant to cut down accidents when 90% of all accidents are by licensed drivers is a little counter-productive.

Originally posted by marbles87
reply to post by dorkfish87

 

Call martial law. Take property and sell to pay debts. Financial crisis is a crisis.

To above above. The goverment has no idea where tax money goes they just take it from wherever there's an account in the black. Imagine how much we could save if we just organized our finances in this country.

I completely agree! But, there may be a couple of issues-

Who would do the audit?
Would we have to hire more government employees?
How would they get paid?

reply to post by VeritasAequitas


That's what I thought it meant. I hate how the government words stuff. You have to be the one who wrote it to understand it.

So if that's the case why are people paying registration.

reply to post by marbles87


Because they don't know any better. They want people to be ignorant of the law so that they can tell them ignorance of it is no excuse...Oh yeah, Mr. Officer? If that is so, wouldn't everybody be lawyers, at which point what need would we have to pay them thousands of dollars...


These bastards make me sick.

reply to post by geo1066


Ill pay their salaries myself haha I'm poor. But seriously it needs to be done and it's one thing I would actually agree to increase taxed temporarily to pay for.

reply to post by VeritasAequitas


The American government is on its death bed and in the poor house we don't have to watch it suffer much longer she will be put out of her misery soon enough. I'm so excited to be part of it. Like we reminisce over the roman empire, people hundreds of years from now will reminisce of the American empire. Hell hopefully i will be important when history is written.

You can either pay for justice or you can't.

reply to post by marbles87


We'd be looking at ridding people of their livelihoods and others of their supplimental incomes. Even if we found an Eagle Scout who was raised by Tibetan monks to do the books, I don't think our servants would allow him to do what's needed.

reply to post by geo1066


Have multiple parties crunch the numbers. If they get diffenent results they are trying to cook the books. Keep them independent and an eye on them and the numbers will come out in the wash.

According to the US Bureau of Transportation Statistics for 2009 there are 254,212,610 registered passenger vehicles. If the average registration fee was $50 that would be $12,710,630,500 per year. Assuming that there are 900,000 police officers in the US (which may be a high estimate), registration fees could pay roughly $14,000 toward each police officer's salary if divided equally. The average pay is $50,454 (as low as $34,000 and $68,000 on the high end).

So while $12.7 Billion sounds like a lot, the LEO better write out $36,500 in tickets in order to break even or the money has to come from somewhere else. And that hasn't put the first drop of gas in his patrol car, let alone the uniform, ammo, pepper spray and new prods for his taser.

reply to post by marbles87


Good luck getting the original title back from the DMV.
The dealer gave the proof of ownership of the car to the DMV when it was first sold. That little piece of paper called the Manufacturers Statement of Origin. It's about as difficult as getting your orginal birth certificate back.
You bought the state a car and you must to pay yearly for the right to drive it.