The Gnomes are the kitchen cabinet of wily, feral three- and five-ball men in Tennessee who give fits to the white legal political establishment in Nashville and elsewhere.
By David Tulis / NoogaRadio Network
I am a mere three-baller — a man who wears a bow tie as jock strap to support an Adam’s apple bobbing up and down in a daily radio report on FM at NoogaRadio Network.
I’m in high company. The five-ballers are include Levi Thurston, a mechanic and field hand from middle Tennessee now hospitalized with a medical condition near Waco, Texas; I’d say they include John Ballainger, senior gnome now at Jefferson City, east of Knoxville, in a “retirement home.” Others are Christopher Sapp and Ed Soloe with whom I daily consult about defying abuse of due process by police, state departments, entire state branches of government and judges.
They’re five-ballers because, their keen optics protected by brows and eyelids. They can open an oyster at 20 paces with a strong stare or peel back a court case wrapped in mystery or gobbledygook.
Still don’t get the ballers gag? They are men, have Adam’s apples, and eyeballs — c’mon, sir!
While you are comfortably asleep, there are exchanges such as this one in which we digress and regurgitate the issues before us in court action and legal study into which the Holy Spirit is showing by His light that to illumine us in defense of Christendom and its blessings.
Notice that EIVS is seen as the basis for “[ensuring] that all vehicles operating*** are covered by adequate financial security.” She says bond, cash deposit brother “qualifying means” are available.
Not having insurance means one is in a state of “noncompliance.” Insurance is the default.
She says: EIVS to verify insurance. See TCA 55-12-204-206
My reply: 204..says whether financial responsibility has been met with insurance policy. Not that a policy is required. 206..Necessary data elements…but 205 lists the elements.
She says: EIVS aims to ensure adequate financial security..or that vehicle is exempt.
My reply: Financial Security is only required after an accident or judgment and vehicle is exempt because there hasn’t been neither.
She says: Atwood was enacted subsequent to case laws you cited.
My reply: Atwood doesn’t change existing laws.
Christopher Sapp, midstate bureau chief
She also refers to “financial security” rather than “financial responsibility” which was the reason they later cited to be the cause of your revocation. Was the revocation predicated upon failure to provide proof “financial security” or was it for failure to provide proof of “financial responsibility?” Both are VERY different!!!
Notice how they selectively use some verbiage and completely discard other bits. She conveniently leaves out the phrase “subject to registration”…perhaps not all automobiles used on the roads are “subject to registration”…only those engaged in the privileged activity of providing transportation services.
“Financial security” is a term of art that might be made applicable (in advance of an accident) to those engaging in “privilege” but then they would have to acknowledge that the “privilege” of “operating a motor vehicle” is a commercial activity regularly by the state as opposed to those who simply travel in leisure or for personal convenience and necessity upon the public right of way (which likely cannot be regulated by the state.)
Does the Department of Safety require the registration and insurance of bicycles, horses, and Mennonite buggies? If not, why not? Are these not also capable of causing loss or injury? Are vaccination records required for horses that use the roads? Why doesn’t the Department of Revenue seek any form of taxation to compensate for road maintenance from bicyclist, horsemen, and buggy riders? The road tax and registration supposedly compensates state and local entities for their extraordinary use of the roads, not the normal wear and tear from ordinary and casual use of the road.
Chris, Ed, great comments and observations, Chris. The fraud is refusal to recognize the rights of ingress and egress, which are foundational and connect the traveler with soil, land, abode and property. Travel is a soil rights-yielding activity (we all yield from our land to the public claim of roads, land for which is obtained by sale or public condemnation and takings for pay in the public interest).(Let’s thank our leading gnome Hal Anthony for mining this point.)
Hal suggests that since courts refuse clear jurisprudence federal and in probable all the states on travel, that we back up and start our defense in terms of soil, and ingress/egress. We have right of pleasure, private travel. We have right also, under Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824, under congressional protection, right to commerce interstate, as well as intrastate, using the public way.
Chris, your description Saturday about the lake as public waters, and the right all have to be on the public water apart from any “fishing license” is pure genius. We are, as three- or five-ballers, seeing the obvious that we weren’t seeing before. The public right of way (connected to soil) is analogous to the public right of free passage on public waters (connected to navigation on public H2O bodies).
Privilege is enforceable when the state-owned activity is entered — the activity subject to the privilege. If the hook and bait make the bobber wobble, catching the TWRA officer’s gaze, you are subject (if you are in commerce with that license, I would propose) if he churns up alongside you. If the taillights in your car trace your movement down the public right of way and you are in the activity of moving Chris Sapp Dr. Computer boxes FOR HIRE OR UNDER CONTRACT, the deputy can arrest you to enforce the missing bit of red plastic under Title 55. (I propose you could challenge the arrest on numerous grounds, but offer this scene purely as a theoretical).
Chris has been saying without our hearing it clearly that financial security in Title 55 is the state of being that must be proven ahead of time by the REAL objects of privilege in TN, truckers. Truck lines, haulers and bus outfits must show financial security BEFORE entering service in the public interest. Why don’t we? Why doesn’t gran’ma? Why can’t I get the F$50 carrier permit at Tenn. Code Ann. § Title 65-15-103, exempt vehicles — applicability., seeing that I am not exempt with a Class D driver license?
Security is a state of financial well-being that REAL commerce users must show. Financial responsibility, as i explain in the motion for injunction, is a concept that applies itself upon a set of facts or condition upon which one is or must be financially responsibility. The name of the law connotes the arch and form of its operation. it operates upon an accident fact set. In a qualifying crash, the state joins with the parties to bend over the wreck scene, to ensure that the injured party is taken care of by the responsible party.
The 1999 Stulce bill to create mandatory insurance, in paternalistic fashion, proposed to overthrow this cooperative TFRA project and compel insurance company contracts up to 6 million in number, for every registration of a motor vehicle. Regulatory messianism pretends it can avert all harms and evils ahead of their happening. As if the courts were not open to settle disputes. As if the people were so wicked, nonchalant and indifferent that they must be compelled to square up all possible harms ahead of time by compulsory risk pooling.