Does the natural right to use the road -- freely -- actually exist?

In
short, the first thing to make clear is that I have been using the
roads in a motorized vehicle for over 30 years and in that time
frame I have brought no harm to any man or woman. But, it has
cost me thousands of dollars in fees and unjustifiable fines, as
well, I am being forced into a private insurance contract
(scheme) which defies the principles of contract law and
freedom itself.

The Natural Right to Use the Road...

Think about this... Have you ever gotten the urge to just jump in your vehicle and drive
through the country side to get some real fresh air and admire the views -- and really
just get away from it all? (If you haven't driven the west coast of North America yet, you
don't know what you're missing.) There is a real sense of freedom in exploring this
beautiful planet. For someone (or something) to infringe on such an experience without
just cause, is a crime in and of itself. It's an infringement upon a liberty -- without
question! To be forced to pay anything to experience such a freedom is worthy of
argument in our so-called courts of justice.

So, I ventured down a path of truth and came up with a few arguments worthy of
an honorable hearing as the dictates of Natural Justice demands. Here are the links to
these (actual court filed) arguments that: 1) challenges the jurisdiction of the
Highway Traffic Act (Ontario), 2) have well documented Canadian case law and
supporting principle arguments that show the right to use the road is a Natural
Right (Common Law Right/a right that is unalienable) and to infringe on that right is
an infringement upon one's liberties, and 3) forcing individuals into a
contract with a private insurance company is also an infringement upon one's liberties.
These are not all new arguments (although mine are somewhat different) as our
neighbors to the south (whose origins gave a new birth to the free world) have made;
they are old and solid in their foundations with principles leading the way. As Common
Law countries, it's our heritage and as such Statutes that derogate from the
Common Law should be strictly construed (Quae communi legi derogant
stricte interpretantu).
I admire the American Heritage because there is no doubt that there is a great history
that exists of a people standing up against an empire and winning in the name of liberty.
Unfortunately, America today has given way to a corrupt group of "control freaks" while
police brutality is an ever growing concern (do a YouTube search on police brutality).
Phrases that purport to illustrate American ideals like, land of the free, home of the
brave and the American Dream are really just that now... a dream.
America has come a long way in a short period of time (since 9/11) with Americans'
liberties trampled upon, but this is not a new phenomenon. It has been going on for a
much longer time at a lower level and a slower pace. The following is some content that
came from www.LawfulPath.com quoting an American judge:
>>>
"Complete freedom of the highways is so old and well established a blessing that we
have forgotten the days of the Robber Barons and toll roads, and yet, under an act like
this, arbitrarily administered, the highways may be completely monopolized, if,
through lack of interest, the people submit, then they may look to see the most sacred
of their liberties taken from them one by one, by more or less rapid encroachment."
Robertson vs. Department of Public Works, 180 Wash 133, 147.

The words of Justice Tolman ring most prophetically in the ears of Citizens throughout
the country today as the use of the public roads has been monopolized by the very
entity which has been empowered to stand guard over our freedoms,
i.e., that of state government.
The Americans' definition of personal liberty is:
"Personal liberty, or the Right to enjoyment of life and liberty, is one of the
fundamental or natural Rights, which has been protected by its inclusion as a
guarantee in the various constitutions, which is not derived from, or dependent on, the
U.S. Constitution, which may not be submitted to a vote and may not depend on the
outcome of an election. It is one of the most sacred and valuable Rights, as sacred as
the Right to private property ... and is regarded as inalienable."
16 C.J.S., Constitutional Law, Sect.202, p.987
>>>
There is no argument that can be made upon it in which it is true that using the roads
unmolested is a natural right or not. [And hey, if you're out there driving like an idiot
and being a danger to others, then you should lose that right if you don't come to your
senses. It's up to each and every one of us to act responsibly.] The real argument here is
how is it they think they can take those rights away from you without just cause? And
not paying your fees and fines is not just cause in my opinion thats
simply extortion!!
If you read the documents and visit the site above -- simply do your own diligence in
researching this topic -- you will come to the conclusion, based on case law and principle
arguments, that the right to use the roads unmolested is unchallengeable by anyone. It's
the way it has always been and the way it should always be. It has long been established
as an unalienable right and an unalienable right is defined in law as that
which cannot be sold or transferred without your consent.

Until next time, this is the commoner known as Shawn,

with the family name Cassista, educating everyone about

their natural rights -- long established in the fight for

Truth, Freedom and Justice -- with which Liberty
will reign!