Adventures Success Stories?

[indio]

Micah68 Wrote:The answer is the triumph of wishful thinking over reality.

There are lots of things about the legal system that I don't like. But I don't pretend that the things I don't like don't exist, or aren't valid and won't be enforced by a court.

In other words, I'm aspirational and perhaps idealistic, but I'm rational and not delusional.

My point is there needs to be a taxable event. Without evidence of a taxable event occurring, how can a summons be sought? The courts are to do substantial justice. There is nothing to a summons and no substantial basis for it absent some specific event. To be redundant , a taxable event.

In re standing:
What is really being talked about is the minimum sufficient contacts test and presence within the State. Don't even say they are the State's roads either and use that as evidence of presence or contacts. They aren't the State's roads.

Normally the State does have "standing" because there is a complaining party that begs for protection. They effectively assign their private right of action. Well, what happens when the complaining party is the State and that complaint is not based on any particular member of the organized public complaining? The State is becoming a self-perpetuating automaton. I look at it like a piece of computer code . Software instructions written in legalese creating imaginary victims for their insurance scheme aka "Automobile and traffic safety regulations".

It's forced(literally) placed insurance nothing more.