J.A.I.L. News Journal
______________________________________________________
Los Angeles,
California
May 1, 2005
Los
Angeles Police Department Goes Into Auto Sales
Business
(By Ron Branson - J.A.I.L.
CIC)
I know this article may seem
shocking to many of you as you ask yourselves, "What is a police
department doing in auto sales?" That was exactly my question as I picked
up the mail a couple days ago on April 27, 2005.
It is typical in Los Angeles
that we receive numerous advertisement flyers in the mail from
surrounding auto dealerships seeking to sell their cars to the
community and to improve their business -- each dealer competing
with other dealers. This is natural and to be
expected.
But on this date I also
received a competing flyer from the L.A.P.D. featuring full-color
photographs, cars for sale. This L.A.P.D. advertisement flyer says,
"Cars, Trucks & SUV's >From $500." Then
the flyer features models available for sale of Hondas, Chevys,
Jeeps, Fords, Toyotas, Nissans and more. The
photographs display what appears to be new or next to new
automobiles, which includes a beautiful new red chromed-plated
mag-wheeled pick-up truck.
The first thing that struck
me was, why is the L.A.P.D. using public tax dollars to go into auto
sales business in competition with legitimate car sales businesses?
I have several automobile dealers immediately around me, to wit,
Hondas, Fords, Toyotas, etc., and if I do not have available what I want
within walking distance, all I have to do is go approximately four miles
wherein is "Automobile Row," which is lined on both sides of a major
boulevard. Now enters the market L.A.P.D. Auto Sales, advertising
the sale of automobiles through the mail.
Now here's the clincher of
this ad, and that is where they are getting their stock of cars for sale.
Is it from the auto manufacturers? No! It says, "Seized And Sold
Locally." These are cars they have taken from their owners and are now
selling "From $500." Ah! --now I know how it is that this L.A.P.D.
Auto Dealership can offer such excellent car deals, which
incidentally cuts away from local merchants who
run legitimate car dealerships, and who buy their cars from
manufacturers. They get them free -- from you.
Here you have auto
dealers advertising their cars for $20,000 to $35,000, and then you see
this L.A.P.D. flyer featuring a photograph of a car just like it
available from the L.A.P.D. dealership for as little as
$500.
I do not know about you,
but if I owned an auto dealership here, I would be screaming "Unfair
competition." My competition is in the automobile
business using tax dollars, and then they pay no taxes on
their profits gained by their auto
sales business.
Lest any of you are saying,
"But these are automobiles that are gotten from mean and wicked
people who deserve to lose their automobiles," let me paint a little
different picture for you. California, along with many other states, have
now required that all people behind the wheel possess a Social Security
Number. This new Social Security requirement has now disenfranchised many
thousands of good citizens who, for
conscience toward God,
or reasons of faith, or otherwise, do not have the required
number to retain their driver's licenses.
Supposedly, the whole idea of
the driver's licenses, as has been argued by the government, is
to ascertain whether one is competent to handle a motorized vehicle
safely upon the roads and highways of the state. But that reason has now
changed. We have looked into this change that is affecting thousands of
people, and have found that people having been safe drivers for the
past fifty years, and who have never once had a accident, are
now no longer qualified to retain their driver's licenses, and are being
deprived of their driver's licenses.
And why are they no longer
qualified to drive? Is it becaust ehy are a risk? No! It is purely
because of their conscience toward God relating to the Social
Security number, that is, they do not believe in, or adhere to, what they
believe is a godless number. These people are all candidates for having
their automobiles seized from them by L.A.P.D.. and their car sold at the
"L.A.P.D. Auto Dealership." In other words, STOLEN.
When inquiry is made at the
D.M.V. about this "number" requirement, we have found divided
opinions expressed. Even a manager at the DMV agreed that it
is A crazy POLICY that Social Security is tied in with
retaining one's driver's license. The manager, agreeing with the
pricipled common-sense argument, called Sacramento and tried to talk
sense with them on this, but was told, "The law is the law, and the
people have to obey the law."
The next stage, since the
D.M.V. said the law is the law, was to test whether one was
obligated to disobey their conscience toward God in order to obey the
law. This was an artfully designed test question on how far
they demanded "obedience," and if that "obedience" had to
defy the God of Nature spoken of in our Declaration of Independence, if
necesary. The DMV's official answer to that question was, "You
must obey the law," which is to say, "Yes, one is obligated to disobey
their conscience toward the God of Nature in order to obey the
law."
While this is the
DMV's official religious mantra, they refuse to address the "God of
Nature" equation. Obviously then, these victims of this
DMV mantra, which are many, have unjustly been deprived
of their driver's licenses for consciences sake, and are now made
the target for replenishing the needed automobile resources for the
L.A.P.D. Auto Dealership.
Now some of you may be
asking, "What has this got to do with J.A.I.L. or an arbitrary
judiciary?" Plenty. This policy, practice and custom of "relieving"
people of their automobiles to sell them on the open market could not in
the least stand up against even a simple constitutional test. For
instance, the victim's automobile is instantly hauled off,
immediately depriving the owner of his property without due process of
law -- a clear violation of the Fifth Amendment. Further, there is no
presumption of innocence at all, but rather one of guilt. No one has
heard or decided anything.
Further, taking the
government's acclaimed argument that "driving is a privilege," even
the courts used to say, "A privilege, once granted, cannot be
deprived without due process of law," meaning that one cannot be
deprived of their driving "privilege" without some sort of hearing
process. But the judges have changed that, and now all these people
are being deprived of their driver's license without being afforded a
hearing process whatsoever. As a result, they are now being deprived not
only of a hearing process, but also their automobile.
Please, please, I ask
our readers not to write us with a myriad of court
cases on "privilege v. rights" arguments on driving. I am
aware of such prior cases as Thompson
vs. Smith, 154 SE 579 "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,"
and Chicago Motor Coach vs. Chicago, 169
NE 221 "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,"
and Schactman vs. Dulles 96 App DC 287,
225 F2d 938, at 941 "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,"
and Kent vs. Dulles, 357 US 116,
125 "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, " or the well-known case of Miranda vs. Arizona, 384 US 436, 491 "Where
rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule
making or legislation which would abrogate them."
I have no doubt that once
J.A.I.L. is passed and becomes operational, these issues will surely be
tested on constitutional grounds in the courts and before the Special
Grand Juries on the question of willful violations of the law and the
Constitution.
For the instant
moment real people are being made real victims of
having their vehicles/properties seized and sold without due
process of law whatsoever, and the judges are not buying their own
prior decided cases that one may not be a deprived of property
without due process of law. We are not talking theory here,
folks, but reality and actual practice, the law, and case
decisions notwithstanding. Forget about your arguments, "They can't do
that!" I am saying the courts are doing that.
This is why we need J.A.I.L.,
and until that time, the people shall continually screaming to us
about the effects of tyranny inflicted upon them by the judges who
hold nothing but contempt for the Constitution they have sworn to
uphold.
J.A.I.L.- Judicial Accountability Initiative Law -
href="../../State_Chapters/dc/DC_initiative.doc">www.jail4judges.org
Contribute to J.A.I.L. at P.O. Box 207, N. Hollywood, CA 91603
See our active flash, http://www.jail4judges.org/Flash.htm
JAIL is a unique addition to our form of gov't. heretofore
unrealized.
JAIL is powerful! JAIL is dynamic! JAIL is America's ONLY hope!
To be added or removed, write [email protected]