In Canada no one who is not acting as a public servant need pay a parking ticket

a reply to: Phage


I already have in the first vid on the post. With regards to Canada. Or you could try this one lol

a reply to: anonentity

I already have in the first vid on the post.

Please point out where a Supreme Court decision about parking tickets is cited.

a reply to: Phage


While I look for something which satisfies your high standards. Parking tickets are issued under contract law, by accepting them you are entering into a contract to pay them. By the same token the people who issue the ticket can be invited to enter into a contract with you . If your contract is clearly displayed on your windscreen , its up to them if they wish to give you a ticket and enter in to your contract.

a reply to: anonentity

Just asking you to back up your claim about the Supreme Court and parking tickets. Because I doubt any such case has ever been heard by them.

You don't have to go to the Supreme Court, you just have to quote cases that are the same charge as yours, which have already been decided by the Supreme Court.

a reply to: Phage


Their can be no penalty or sanction imposed upon one for operating a Constitutional right. (As per the ninth amendment) Their is no question a fine for parking tickets, no license and no registration is converting the right to travel freely into a crime, as per the ninth. Sherar V Cullen 481 F 945.
The traffic ticket states you have seventy two hours to come up with a lawful excuse, if you quote the Ninth and the case , you should never hear from them again.

a reply to: snowspirit


Just came across this for yanks that don't want the hassle of Quoting the Constitution. Fifty per cent of the time the cop who issued the ticket for whatever reason do not turn up in Court, but if you pay bail you can go for trial by declaration, if found not guilty you get your bail money back. The Cops don't get paid for writing out the prosecution papers for trial by declaration, lets face it a lot of Cops can just about read a comic book. Not many people can string a sentence together either these days. Not just the Cops

So I suppose this works because the Cop that issued the ticket, is just too busy to have to write it all out, which trial by declaration makes him do. So because he has to do it in his own time , he shelves it.

a reply to: anonentity

in what cluase of what statute is the exemption found?

Going by the pic in the video pic, I would not rely on the claim the text on the white board seems to indicate.

Suggest going through the defintitions of the relevant statute and check the defintion of 'Driver" it should say that a driver is a person who is paid to drive. Most of us are NOT a driver as defined in the definition. Use Blacks law, the earelir the edition the better.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: anonentity

I already have in the first vid on the post.

Please point out where a Supreme Court decision about parking tickets is cited.

While I have NOT watched the video I would suggest the matter is better fought over the definition of driver.

If the definition in Canada is consistent with the other commonwealth countries, as it should be, the definition of a driver, in the definitions section of the Act, most of us are NOT 'drivers' as defined in the definition, there for the law does not apply to those of us who do not 'drive' for a living.

a reply to: Azureblue

Black's law dictionary is not the law (anywhere).

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: anonentity

Oh, good point. I left that out of my earlier post.

Make sure you yell “I do not consent” at every opportunity. That’s a guaranteed way to stop everybody in their tracks and get what you want.

#trafficviolation, #mycarmyconsent, #metoo

Lol