Why One Should Use Credit Unions and not National Banks

Posted: 16th January 2013 by admin in Banking
Comments Off on Why One Should Use Credit Unions and not National Banks

National Banks are almost completely dependent on ‘Federal Reserve’ funding and the banks in-house creating of “money” by receiving negotiable instruments (promissory notes) that are then fraudulently deposited as a bank liability as a debit and the of setting entry as a “cash” account credit from which they fraudulently lend you funds from.  All of which has never been authorized by Congress, but they have almost full immunity for such crimes when challenged in a US court.  This is why they do not need your money anymore, thus you only get interest on deposits that are often less than the inflationary rate for that year, so essentially you get nothing (no investment return) for saving your money.

Credit Unions and Security Companies generally use your money and they have much different reporting relationships with the United States and the Federal Reserve System thus keeping your business your business.

Why associate with a bank that ignores “equal protection under the law”, if you did what they do (counterfeiting bank accounting credits) 24/7, you would go to jail for a long long time.

Only the Federal Reserve has been allowed to create Federal Reserve Credits/Money by congressional authority, not banks.

It has been reported to me that fraudulent IRS confiscation are much more difficult from Credit Unions and Security Companies.

Paul Hansen 1-17-13

 Click HERE to view the list of foundational information created by Lawyer Paul John Hansen to aid in independence from the US System.

Pay No Sales Tax,

Posted: 9th January 2013 by admin in Sales Tax
Comments Off on Pay No Sales Tax,

This is a letter of one of Paul Hansen’s clients following instructions of ‘how to not pay sales tax‘.  Sales tax are to only be paid when doing business on land owned by the USA.  A billion dollar scam.  If people wrote one check at the end of the year, for all cost that they now pay in a multitude of ways as taxes collected, there would be a rebellion by sunup.

Paul I just thought that I would let you know that I went to the Walmart store that I generally go to and got my exemption card.  It was kind of funny.  The lady said she had to have a zip code.  I said I don’t have one or need one, use any one you like.  She went back to her computer and then a little later she came back looking for a tax identification number.  I told her I did not have one nor did I need one.  I kind of thought she would come back and say she could not get the exemption entered into their computer system but she came back w/a little card that I had to sign to show that I was tax exempt.  She gave me back my exemption forms after she had me fill out one of Walmart’s exemption forms.  She also said that she had been there for fifteen years and had never seen one of these go through.  I wonder if they are told to say fifteen years as that is the exact number of years you mention on your website that one of the vendors that you went to told you they had been there and never seen “one of these”.  Just thought you might want to know.

R Miller, Arizona, 1-8-2013

See More-     Sales Tax Info.

 

Click HERE to view the list of foundational information created by Lawyer Paul John Hansen to aid in independence from the US System.

Traffic Infractions are not Criminal, says California Courts.

Posted: 28th December 2012 by admin in Travel Rights
7

Traffic Citations are not Criminal, says California Courts.

Date: Tue, Dec 25, 2012
Subject: Californian proves cops can’t write you a traffic ticket
for infractions.

This is a subject that is very near and dear to my heart. As someone
who has been studying the vehicle code and it’s legislative history
on and off for the past 12 years, I just can’t help but smile when
someone proves in open court that the vehicle enforcement apparatus
is nothing more than a massive racketeering operation. OK, maybe
he didn’t prove that, but Dan Giguere of Los Angeles did prove that
the police can’t write a ticket for an infraction.

Dan received a traffic citation a little over a year ago for unsafe
speed in violation of California Vehicle Code section 22350. Dan
went to court and made a special appearance to obtain information as
to who the plaintiff in the case was so that he can file a motion
and properly serve the opposing party. Since the citation doesn’t
indicate who that party is, it was fair to ask the court. Instead
of answering Dan’s question the judge entered a plea of not guilty
with Dan’s objection. Dan was able to quote a California court case
known as People v. Sava which ruled “The limitation of an accused
right to a jury trial has withstood constitutional attack upon the
rationale that the legislature had never intended infractions to
be criminal. The Judge agreed and admitted that the case is not
criminal, which is correct. The judge set the case for trial and
ignored the obvious implications of such a fact.

Dan consulted the Vehicle code and the powers of arrest by a peace
officer and it turns out that peace officers only have the authority
to make an arrest without a warrant if they have probable cause to
believe a public offense has been committed in their presence.  A
public offense according to 683 of the Penal code is a type of
offense that warrants a criminal prosecution. But since infractions
are not crimes, then it can’t be a public offense. Some of you may
think “wait a minute, I’m not arrested when I’m given a ticket.”  Oh
yes you are. According to 40500 of the Vehicle code a traffic stop
and issuance of a notice to appear constitutes an arrest, besides
what happens if you refuse to sign the ticket? They will threaten to take you
off to jail, and sometimes will.

Dan filed a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction
and a motion to suppress the notice to appear arguing that the
officer lacked any probable cause to believe a crime has been
committed in his presence and therefore no crime has been alleged.  He
filed with the court just a few days before his trial. The judge
agreed with the motion and suppressed the citation and dismissed
Dan’s case.

The significance of this is huge because what you have are peace
officers (city employees) conducting traffic arrests for non-criminal activity,
triggering debt collection actions on behalf of non-complaining
parties by way of a voidable notice to appear.

The next time I get pulled over for an infraction I’m simply going
to ask the officer “What is your probable cause to believe a crime
has been committed?” If he starts to name anything other than an
actual crime than I’m going to tell the officer that infractions are
not crimes according the California Supreme court and that I don’t
consent to the stop”.  Once I say I don’t consent and the officer
doesn’t release me, they can be charged for  “False Arrest” and that is a crime.

Remember if it is a law principal in the “state” of California it s a law principal in all jurisdiction in which a US court operates.
Good job Dan.
I  wander if one can go back on old charges and do the same, probable cause is jurisdiction in the first instance, so the arraignment would be a nullity and all after also.
[11:38:09 AM] WTP, williamfrancis1: See if there is a statute of limitations on barratry.
[11:39:45 AM] pauljjhansen.com: I am quite sure there is no statute of limitation on subject matter jurisdiction in the first instance, no jurisdiction in the first instance means to time starts ticking that is associated with a statute of limitations.

>>>

I personally believe a non-statutory territorial jurisdiction challenge by “Plea In Abatement” should always be your first challenge.  Paul John Hansn

P.S.  I used one in Nebraska with no registration, suspended license, no liability coverage, and one failure to appear, and the court has now, for 60 days,  sat on an “under advisement” statues, so it is obvious the court is in a quandary of what to do.  Paul John Hansen 12-29-2012

Original intent of the Legislature is a powerful defense.

Click HERE to view the list of foundational information created by Lawyer Paul John Hansen to aid in independence from the US System.

Only Citizens Can Legally Vote- most are not.

Posted: 18th December 2012 by admin in Citizen vs. Free Inhabitant, Registered Voter
Comments Off on Only Citizens Can Legally Vote- most are not.

Only US Citizens can register to vote in US Elections, One must be born or naturalized in the United States to qualify, If your birth certificate does not say “The United States of America” on it you were born on land not in the United States and if not naturalized into the United States you are not a US Citizen even if you have a Social Security Number or a Voter Registration Card. In-fact you are, if known to you, are fraudulently voting.

AMENDMENT XIV
Passed by Congress June 13, 1866. Ratified July 9, 1868.
Note: Article I, section 2, of the Constitution was modified by section 2 of the 14th amendment.  Section 1.
“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
Much more freedom is found in not being a US Citizen, than in being one. See free inhabitant, Article 4, of the Articles of Confederation.

Paul Hansen

Click HERE to view the list of foundational information created by Lawyer Paul John Hansen to aid in independence from the US System.

Hansen Subpoenas Head Prosecutor, He Retires the Very Same Hour.

Posted: 18th December 2012 by admin in Oath or Affirmation
Comments Off on Hansen Subpoenas Head Prosecutor, He Retires the Very Same Hour.

Douglas County, Nebraska, Head Prosecutor, Martin Conboy, has his 29 year retirement party the same hour that I had him subpoenaed to appear to testify why he had no 4th Amendment “Oath or Affirmation” in the Official Record in support of the warrant issued for failure to appear on a traffic citation. I think it odd that after 29 years the subpoenaed Prosecutor and the Court and the people organizing his retirement (going away) party the very same hour that my trial was to start in which he was subpoenaed as my witness to testify why he violates the bill of rights by having warrants issued with no supporting oath or affirmation (affidavit) in the official record when a warrant was issued for my arrest. And the Court denied my, already served upon Conboy, subpoena, minutes before the trial was to start. Essentially the Court has no General Jurisdiction to issue a warrant without this affidavit signed by the arresting officer, nor does the Court have a valid criminal complaint (information) in record for that too must be supported by an affidavit by the arresting (charging) officer also.

Amendment IV- “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”
We have sent this to Federal Prisoners and several were released immediately with no explanation and with no other appeals, challenges, or motions pending.

Paul Hansen

December 2012 – I have another identical case in Sarpy County, Nebraska, it has been 45 days under advisement, the Judge apparently does not know what to do.

No oath or affirmation was present in that case also, for the prosecutors affirmation will not meet the 4th Amendment for he is not a first hand witness.

 Click HERE to view the list of foundational information created by Lawyer Paul John Hansen to aid in independence from the US System.

Pay No Personal Property Tax.

Posted: 7th December 2012 by admin in Pay No Property Tax, Tax, Tax / Property
Comments Off on Pay No Personal Property Tax.

Ed,
If students are looking for success stories here is one of three major ones I have had applying my education from what I have learned as a student.

Below is the final letter I wrote for my daughter in Idaho concerning personal property tax. There were three letters total and two responses from the Deputy Prosecuting Attorney, after this letter all correspondence stopped and she has not heard from him for over two years.

I consider this a major success as she is a very visible and successful professional and would have been an easy target for a powerful Prosecuting Attorney. His second response was a threat to lien her home and then sell it at a tax sale but this was all huff and puff as she just sold her home last month and there was never a lien attached.

Powerful.

Gary
——————————————————————————————————————————————————————————–

September 8, 2010

Deputy Prosecuting Attorney
_________ County Assessor Office
County Courthouse – _______ Street
________, Idaho 83___
Dear Mr.___________,
I received your letter dated ___________. I want to make it very clear Mr. ______, I am not in any way unlawfully refusing, upon demand, to give to any county assessor, in the discharge of his/her official duties, a list of my personal property that would be subject to taxation, or to refuse to swear to such a list. I am simply requesting that I be provided with the written law from the Idaho Statutes and a verified document providing proof of the county assessor’s established Territorial Jurisdiction over my private home and the land on which it is built, with the commonly known identification of ____________Street, ________, Idaho.
As you know all written law, including the State of Idaho Statutes, must identify the territory to which it applies. This is known as Territorial Jurisdiction, which in any interaction with a government entity or employee, must be proven if requested. Your response letter made absolutely no reference to the specific written law that gives __________ County or a County employee Territorial Jurisdiction over me personally or the land I live on. Your response merely told me you “disagree” with the suggestion that the term “in the state” or “in this state” apply to personal property taxation but failed to support this “disagreement” with written law. As a licensed attorney for ________ County you certainly know that a written law is not law if it is ambiguous, and I can not imagine that the Idaho Statutes would not have a specific legal definition written in a complete English sentence conveying a complete and clear thought for the word/terms “State” / “state of Idaho” or “State of Idaho” / “in the state” or “in this state” / “include, included and including.” If you would kindly send to me these definitions, directly from the written law (not court decisions or precedence’s) in your next correspondence, it would be appreciated, as it would help answer and resolve the issue of Territorial Jurisdiction of _________ County.
As, the written law that you do quote has nothing to do with territorial jurisdiction and only serves to define the punishment that “________ County” can dole out to anyone who fails to file the “required” paperwork and pay the taxes deemed to be mandatory I am required to request the following:
You quote Idaho Statutes 63-302 as an authority. I have never received the formal statutory “notice” requiring a personal property owner to make a correct list of taxable personal property. Please send this specific statutory notice if I am within _______ County Territorial Jurisdiction.
You quote Idaho Statutes 18-6301 as an authority. I have never received the formal statutory “demand” to give to any county assessor a list of his property subject to taxation. Please send this specific statutory demand if I am within _________ County Territorial Jurisdiction.
Sincerely,
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Idaho Statutes

TITLE 63
REVENUE AND TAXATION
CHAPTER 3
ASSESSMENT OF REAL AND PERSONAL PROPERTY
63-302. List of taxable personal property. (1) The assessor shall leave at the office, place of business or residence of each personal property owner, or mail to such personal property owner at his last known post office address, a form with notice requiring such personal property owner to make a correct list of taxable personal property.

TITLE 18
CRIMES AND PUNISHMENTS
CHAPTER 63
REVENUE AND TAXATION
18-6301. Taxation — Refusal to give assessor list of property. Every person who unlawfully refuses upon demand to give to any county assessor a list of his property subject to taxation, or to swear to such list, or who gives a false name, or fraudulently refuses to give his true name, to any assessor when demanded by such assessor in the discharge of his official duties, is guilty of a misdemeanor.

Click HERE to view the list of foundational information created by Lawyer Paul John Hansen to aid in independence from the US System.

PERSONAL SECESSION FROM THE UNION OF THE UNITED STATES?

Posted: 16th November 2012 by admin in Secession
Comments Off on PERSONAL SECESSION FROM THE UNION OF THE UNITED STATES?

WHAT IS THE CONSTITUTIONAL LAW OF PERSONAL SECESSION FROM THE UNION OF THE UNITED STATES?
The issue of whether or not a State could secede from the first Union, the Confederacy, the United States of America, or the second Union of dependent federal States, was purportedly decided by the War Between the States, however, as that war was prosecuted using the power and authority of the unadopted Constitution of September 17, 1787 and Constitution of the United States, the right of a State to secede from either Union remains unsettled. Secession of a kind is readily available to any individual not confined to territory owned by or subject to the exclusive legislative power of the United States of America.
The legal history and the official written record of the written law and government of the United States of America, after King George III is removed as the head of state and government , is found in the four Organic Laws of the United States of America. The first Organic Law recognizes the inherent freedom of all mankind in general and the American people in particular. The remaining three Organic Laws: the Articles of Confederation of November 15, 1777, the Northwest Ordinance of July 13, 1787 and the Constitution of September 17, 1787 are binding upon the two classes of States which constitute the two Unions. The inhabitants of those States and the territory owned by or subject to the exclusive legislative power of the United States of America are subject to the written law of those States and the United States of America while physically present on the territory belonging to the United States of America.
The right of the American people to be free from government regulation is expressly provided for in the provision for personal abstention from political life in Article IV of the Articles of Confederation of November 15, 1777. These Articles, which are binding on all the member Confederate States, were the first written Constitution for the United States of America. The third Organic Law of the United States of America, the Northwest Ordinance of July 13, 1787, was an act of the United States in Congress assembled, which was binding on the settlers and inhabitants of the District, soon to be known as the United States.
The Constitution of September 17, 1787, had it been legally adopted by the members of a government, would have been the Constitution for the United States of America, as the Preamble suggests, because the Articles of Confederation of November 15, 1777 was then the Constitution of the United States of America. The purpose of the Constitution of September 17, 1787, when lawfully adopted, was to make permanent the Northwest Ordinance of July 13, 1787 as the Constitution of the United States. George Washington took the oral oath to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States,” however, adoption of the Constitution of September 17, 1787 failed when no one was bound by subscribed oath “to support this Constitution,” the Constitution of September 17, 1787.
The planned failure to adopt the Constitution of September 17, 1787 allowed the federal government, the United States of America, to begin the “administration” of the United States of America as if it were, the United States, the territory owned by or subject to the exclusive legislative power of the United States of America. Unrestrained by an adopted Constitution, the federal government has conflated the United States of America into the United States, the territory owned by or subject to the exclusive legislative power of the United States of America.
An unadopted Constitution of September 17, 1787, while still binding on the State governments, does not bind the people. The people either individually or en masse are free to “secede” from State Unions they were never a part of.
Secession from the Union of States constituted of the territory owned by or subject to the exclusive legislative power of the United States of America is accomplished by the individual severing all ties to the “quasi-government” headed by the President of the United States. Attaining the freedom and independence of a free inhabitant under Article IV of the Articles of Confederation of November 15, 1777 requires a basic understanding of all four Organic Laws.

If you wish to have a confident understanding of how to “succeed at seceding” be it individually or by mass, contact me, for only 50$ you can start the “Basic Course in Law and Government”.
Paul Hansen, pauljjhansen@hotmail.com

Click here to enroll / buy now –

NOTICE – 3-24-14 – Due to recent difficulties with Paypal send all payment by mailing money orders payable to Paul John Hansen, mailing address 1548 N 19, Omaha, NE 68110.

“Basic Course in Law and Government”.

Click HERE to view the list of foundational information created by Lawyer Paul John Hansen to aid in independence from the US System.

Click HERE to view the list of foundational information created by Lawyer Paul John Hansen to aid in independence from the US System.

Citizen, How does one become a US Citizen by law?

Posted: 17th October 2012 by admin in Citizen vs Free Inhabitant process, Citizen vs. Free Inhabitant
Comments Off on Citizen, How does one become a US Citizen by law?

When one is standing on land owned by the USA one is a temporary subject to the written laws of the US.  This changes as soon as one steps off that land.

When one becomes a citizen of the US “by process” it takes “a process” to renounce citizenship.

The process of becoming a US citizen is found in US written law, as follows:

Statute at large to become a US citizen is “The act of Congress of April 14, 1802, 2 Stat. 153, c, 28, Statute 2165,.

“An alien may be admitted to become a citizen of the United States in the following manner, and not otherwise.”

1. “He shall, two Years at least prior to his admission, declare before a proper court his intention to become a citizen of the United States, and to renounce his allegiance to the potentate or sovereignty of which he may be at the time a citizen or subject.”

2. “He shall, at the time of his application to be admitted, declare, on oath, before some one of the court above specified, that he will support the Constitution of the United States, and that he absolutely and entirely renounces and abjures all allegiance and fidelity to every foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty; and particularly, by name . to the prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of which he was before a citizen or subject, which proceedings shall be recorded by the clerk of the court.”

3. “It shall be made to appear to the satisfaction of the court admitting such alien that he has resided within the United States five years at least, and within the state or territory where such court is at the time held one year at least and that during that time he has behaved as a man of good moral character, attached to the principles of the Constitution of the United States, and well disposed to the good order and happiness of the same; but the oath of the resident shall in no case be allowed to prove his residence.”

>>

“An alien may be admitted to become a citizen of the United States in the following manner, and not otherwise.” [‘not otherwise’ means by no other way]

1. “He shall, two Years at least prior to his admission, declare before a proper court [a US Court] his intention to become a citizen of the United States, and to renounce his allegiance to the potentate or sovereignty of which he may be at the time a citizen or subject [In my case I would need to renounce my free inhabitant standing].”

2. “He shall, at the time of his application to be admitted, declare, on oath, before some one of the court above specified, that he will support the Constitution of the United States, and that he absolutely and entirely renounces and abjures all allegiance and fidelity to every foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty; and particularly, by name . to the prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of which he was before a citizen or subject, which proceedings shall be recorded by the clerk of the court [I would suppose that such court must be of/on land owned by the USA].”

3. “It shall be made to appear to the satisfaction of the court admitting such alien that he has resided [lived on land owned by the US] within the United States five years at least, and within the state or territory where such court is at the time held one year at least and that during that time he has behaved as a man of good moral character, attached to the principles of the Constitution of the United States, and well disposed to the good order and happiness of the same; but the oath of the resident shall in no case be allowed to prove his residence.” [residency must be supported by more than just his word]

>>

Therefore, all U.S. citizens [i.e. franchised citizens of the District of Columbia] residing in one of the states of the Union, are classified as property, as franchisee’s of the federal government, and as an “individual entity”. See Wheeling Steel Corp. v. Fox, 298 U.S. 193, 80 L.Ed. 1143, 56 S.Ct. 773.

Under the “Buck Act”, 4 U.S.C.S. Secs. 105-113, the federal government has created a “Federal area” within the boundaries of all the several states. (In Nebraska that consists of about 1.4% of the land as of 2018.)

>>

Being subject to US written law can be a very confined life, at times in history it required little, today it takes close to 50% of you labor/earnings, and they could by mere congressional vote demand 100%.

Possibly if one is born on USA owned land one needs to renounce citizenship and become a subject to the class of free inhabitants, I am not sure, nor know how/where one would do this. -Paul Hansen-

(The above 1802 written law has been amended slightly.)

Much of the above came from this article by the INFORMER. (Look for the 1-4-12 Post)

Click HERE to view the list of foundational information created by Lawyer Paul John Hansen to aid in independence from the US System.

Right To Travel, Duty Free, Tax on Carriages (Automobiles), Limited to US Property.

Posted: 27th September 2012 by admin in Travel Rights
Comments Off on Right To Travel, Duty Free, Tax on Carriages (Automobiles), Limited to US Property.

Below is an 1794 Act that taxes carriages, (which still applied to present day automobiles)  but it is tricky how they hid that it can only have force and effect on land owned by the United States.

Sorry for the small print, it is found in United States – Third Congress, Sess 1, CH. 43,45 1794, on page 373.

The foot note is where the scope of the act is to operate:

“The act of Congress of June 5, 1794, laying duties upon carriages for the conveyance of persons, is a constitutional act, and within the authority granted to Congress by the 8th section of the first article of the constitution. Hylton v. The United States, 3 Dall. 171; 1 Cond. Rep. 83.”

Click here to see the full Act.

It is limited to the “exclusive Legislative Authority” as found in the 8th section of the first article of the constitution.  See below:

“To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession (D.C.) of particular States, and the acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings; And”     Article I, Section 8, (par.17) United States Constitution, September 17, 1787.

Click HERE to view the list of foundational information created by Lawyer Paul John Hansen to aid in independence from the US System.

Officer Can Not Prove Land is “of” the United States.

Posted: 24th August 2012 by admin in Territorial jurisdiction
Comments Off on Officer Can Not Prove Land is “of” the United States.

Just spent an hour in a Nebraska County Court (Sarpy), The Officer could not produce fact evidence that the act took place “on” land that is a possession or territory “of” the United States.  Trial is Set to Continue.

I now understand that the “State” that the US Constitution with the USC calls a “State” of Nebraska is land in Nebraska owned by the USA.

Now the “State of Nebraska” is a grouped word title, different from the above singular word “State” and is therefore an entity (corporate), with its own land holding, yet being subject to its creator the USA.

So the land I was claimed to be traveling on without registration is of the “State of Nebraska” a corporate entity, (see accompanying Deed showing the highway where the stop occurred land owner) not of land “of” the United States which the statute requires to have force and effect of law.

Oh how tricky they have been, such a play on of words to trick us into believing US Court jurisdiction exists at this specific location.

So now I must direct examination the Officer and force him to admit ether the land is not “of” the United States, or admit he does not know and has not been able to bring that evidence to the Court, and if he says it is then I’ll demand he produce the fact evidence to support his statement.

For if the statement is not supported by fact it is only a belief then…..     Court of Appeals of Texas, Texarkana. May 4, 2012 366 S.W.3d 732      “An affidavit, based on the affiant’s “best knowledge and belief,” is no evidence of the facts asserted.”

Federal Rules of Evidence, 28 U.S.C.A. Rule 602. Need for Personal Knowledge

A witness may testify to a matter only if evidence is introduced sufficient to support a finding that the witness has personal knowledge of the matter. Evidence to prove personal knowledge may consist of the witness’ s own testimony. This rule does not apply to a witness’s expert testimony under Rule 703

Therefore – Court must dismiss because no evidence of the criminal charge took place in (on land) the claimed jurisdiction of where the written law has force and effect of law applies.

[[All Motor Vehicle violations must occur in the state, state is defined as:

Statutes > Nebraska > Chapter 60 MOTOR VEHICLES >  60-666 State, defined.
60-666. State, defined.State shall mean a state, territory, or possession of the United States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, or a province of Canada. Source Laws 1993, LB 370, § 162.

Click HERE to view the list of foundational information created by Lawyer Paul John Hansen to aid in independence from the US System.

Older Entries
Newer Entries