CS related licene suspension question...

"Pamela" wrote in message
hlink.net...
I never respond to this stuff, but you know, I don't think taking a
person's
license for failure to provide for his children is extreme.

I have an ex who has not paid child support for years, may see his
daughter
whenever he wants, makes a great income, and cheats and steals his way
through life.

Taking his driver's license away seems a rather amusing way to wake him
up.
More I think about it, the more I like it.

We teach our children that there are consequences to what we do. Perhaps,
ex's who disregard the health and welfare of their children ought to be
taught the same lesson.

I got a huge lesson in what children think about these types of legal
proceedings against fathers from my daughter. Her mother tried to tell her
all the bad stuff happening to her dad was created by the state. My
daughter was very direct in telling her mom, the reason the state is taking
those actions against dad is because you ask them to do it. The mothers who
hide behind the state's legal processes just don't get how much the children
understand about the process.

"Editor - Child Support News" wrote in message
...

"Dusty" wrote in message
...

But I put this to you.. What sort of legal action could one bring to
bear
to fight such draconian practices? Could there be (or has there been)
some
sort of Constitutional argument against such non-sense? Has it worked?

Unfortunately, you don't have the right to drive...it's a privilege
afforded
to you by the State.

I'm thinking that one has the right to travel.. the right to life,
liberty
and the pursuit of happiness.. could this be an argument used in court?
I
wonder...

One's right to travel can be limited by the State...think "being out on
bond" when a magistrate can command you not to leave the state.

And if your children live out of state? What then? Pretend that the state
line does a "drop 'n drag" and follows you into the next state while you
visit your kids?

Sounds of just too much traveling in and around "Indian Country" to me...

I wonder just how many cops are willing to look the other way, or flat out
ignore the law (with the idea that the law is asinine to begin with). And
on that note.. just how many are more then willing to make life even more
miserable for the beatdead NCP..

One's right to travel in the U.S. has been secured by the Courts, but not
one's right to travel OUTSIDE of the US borders.

OK, so let's stay inside the lines then.. What sort of "securing" of the
right to travel inside the states did the courts do? Any examples? Would
this case-law be of use in defeating extra-state orders and used (for lack
of a better term) in regaining one's DL?

Don't mind me, just getting single-minded on this issue. Kinda like picking
at a scab... finding loop-holes in CSE's enforcement armor (not that it's
all that difficult, just hard to find decent arguments to use in court) and
use it in court to defeat the draconian measures that CSE takes to
financially ruin NCPs... and thereby crush them at their own game.

So, I'm gonna keep pickin' at this scab for a while yet... until I find a
way to heal it or it kills me.

"Editor - Child Support News" wrote in message
...

"Dusty" wrote in message
...

But I put this to you.. What sort of legal action could one bring to
bear
to fight such draconian practices? Could there be (or has there been)
some
sort of Constitutional argument against such non-sense? Has it worked?

Unfortunately, you don't have the right to drive...it's a privilege
afforded
to you by the State.

I'm thinking that one has the right to travel.. the right to life,
liberty
and the pursuit of happiness.. could this be an argument used in court?
I
wonder...

One's right to travel can be limited by the State...think "being out on
bond" when a magistrate can command you not to leave the state.

And if your children live out of state? What then? Pretend that the state
line does a "drop 'n drag" and follows you into the next state while you
visit your kids?

Sounds of just too much traveling in and around "Indian Country" to me...

I wonder just how many cops are willing to look the other way, or flat out
ignore the law (with the idea that the law is asinine to begin with). And
on that note.. just how many are more then willing to make life even more
miserable for the beatdead NCP..

One's right to travel in the U.S. has been secured by the Courts, but not
one's right to travel OUTSIDE of the US borders.

OK, so let's stay inside the lines then.. What sort of "securing" of the
right to travel inside the states did the courts do? Any examples? Would
this case-law be of use in defeating extra-state orders and used (for lack
of a better term) in regaining one's DL?

Don't mind me, just getting single-minded on this issue. Kinda like picking
at a scab... finding loop-holes in CSE's enforcement armor (not that it's
all that difficult, just hard to find decent arguments to use in court) and
use it in court to defeat the draconian measures that CSE takes to
financially ruin NCPs... and thereby crush them at their own game.

So, I'm gonna keep pickin' at this scab for a while yet... until I find a
way to heal it or it kills me.

"Editor - Child Support News" wrote in message
...

"Dusty" wrote in message
...

But I put this to you.. What sort of legal action could one bring to
bear
to fight such draconian practices? Could there be (or has there been)
some
sort of Constitutional argument against such non-sense? Has it worked?

Unfortunately, you don't have the right to drive...it's a privilege
afforded
to you by the State.

I'm thinking that one has the right to travel.. the right to life,
liberty
and the pursuit of happiness.. could this be an argument used in court?
I
wonder...

One's right to travel can be limited by the State...think "being out on
bond" when a magistrate can command you not to leave the state.

And if your children live out of state? What then? Pretend that the state
line does a "drop 'n drag" and follows you into the next state while you
visit your kids?

Sounds of just too much traveling in and around "Indian Country" to me...

I wonder just how many cops are willing to look the other way, or flat out
ignore the law (with the idea that the law is asinine to begin with). And
on that note.. just how many are more then willing to make life even more
miserable for the beatdead NCP..

One's right to travel in the U.S. has been secured by the Courts, but not
one's right to travel OUTSIDE of the US borders.

OK, so let's stay inside the lines then.. What sort of "securing" of the
right to travel inside the states did the courts do? Any examples? Would
this case-law be of use in defeating extra-state orders and used (for lack
of a better term) in regaining one's DL?

Don't mind me, just getting single-minded on this issue. Kinda like picking
at a scab... finding loop-holes in CSE's enforcement armor (not that it's
all that difficult, just hard to find decent arguments to use in court) and
use it in court to defeat the draconian measures that CSE takes to
financially ruin NCPs... and thereby crush them at their own game.

So, I'm gonna keep pickin' at this scab for a while yet... until I find a
way to heal it or it kills me.

"Editor - Child Support News" wrote in message
...

"Dusty" wrote in message
...

But I put this to you.. What sort of legal action could one bring to
bear
to fight such draconian practices? Could there be (or has there been)
some
sort of Constitutional argument against such non-sense? Has it worked?

Unfortunately, you don't have the right to drive...it's a privilege
afforded
to you by the State.

I'm thinking that one has the right to travel.. the right to life,
liberty
and the pursuit of happiness.. could this be an argument used in court?
I
wonder...

One's right to travel can be limited by the State...think "being out on
bond" when a magistrate can command you not to leave the state.

And if your children live out of state? What then? Pretend that the state
line does a "drop 'n drag" and follows you into the next state while you
visit your kids?

Sounds of just too much traveling in and around "Indian Country" to me...

I wonder just how many cops are willing to look the other way, or flat out
ignore the law (with the idea that the law is asinine to begin with). And
on that note.. just how many are more then willing to make life even more
miserable for the beatdead NCP..

One's right to travel in the U.S. has been secured by the Courts, but not
one's right to travel OUTSIDE of the US borders.

OK, so let's stay inside the lines then.. What sort of "securing" of the
right to travel inside the states did the courts do? Any examples? Would
this case-law be of use in defeating extra-state orders and used (for lack
of a better term) in regaining one's DL?

Don't mind me, just getting single-minded on this issue. Kinda like picking
at a scab... finding loop-holes in CSE's enforcement armor (not that it's
all that difficult, just hard to find decent arguments to use in court) and
use it in court to defeat the draconian measures that CSE takes to
financially ruin NCPs... and thereby crush them at their own game.

So, I'm gonna keep pickin' at this scab for a while yet... until I find a
way to heal it or it kills me.

Pamela wrote:
I never respond to this stuff, but you know, I don't think taking a
person's license for failure to provide for his children is extreme.

I have an ex who has not paid child support for years, may see his
daughter whenever he wants, makes a great income, and cheats and
steals his way through life.

Taking his driver's license away seems a rather amusing way to wake
him up. More I think about it, the more I like it.

We teach our children that there are consequences to what we do.
Perhaps, ex's who disregard the health and welfare of their children
ought to be taught the same lesson.

Differentiate "won't pay" and "can't pay". For those who are trying,
it just makes the problem worse. The kids are the ones who end up
suffering the most. Supposedly, we're trying to avoid that.

--
Whose cruel idea was it to put an 's' in the word lisp?

Pamela wrote:
I never respond to this stuff, but you know, I don't think taking a
person's license for failure to provide for his children is extreme.

I have an ex who has not paid child support for years, may see his
daughter whenever he wants, makes a great income, and cheats and
steals his way through life.

Taking his driver's license away seems a rather amusing way to wake
him up. More I think about it, the more I like it.

We teach our children that there are consequences to what we do.
Perhaps, ex's who disregard the health and welfare of their children
ought to be taught the same lesson.

Differentiate "won't pay" and "can't pay". For those who are trying,
it just makes the problem worse. The kids are the ones who end up
suffering the most. Supposedly, we're trying to avoid that.

--
Whose cruel idea was it to put an 's' in the word lisp?

Pamela wrote:
I never respond to this stuff, but you know, I don't think taking a
person's license for failure to provide for his children is extreme.

I have an ex who has not paid child support for years, may see his
daughter whenever he wants, makes a great income, and cheats and
steals his way through life.

Taking his driver's license away seems a rather amusing way to wake
him up. More I think about it, the more I like it.

We teach our children that there are consequences to what we do.
Perhaps, ex's who disregard the health and welfare of their children
ought to be taught the same lesson.

Differentiate "won't pay" and "can't pay". For those who are trying,
it just makes the problem worse. The kids are the ones who end up
suffering the most. Supposedly, we're trying to avoid that.

--
Whose cruel idea was it to put an 's' in the word lisp?

Pamela wrote:
I never respond to this stuff, but you know, I don't think taking a
person's license for failure to provide for his children is extreme.

I have an ex who has not paid child support for years, may see his
daughter whenever he wants, makes a great income, and cheats and
steals his way through life.

Taking his driver's license away seems a rather amusing way to wake
him up. More I think about it, the more I like it.

We teach our children that there are consequences to what we do.
Perhaps, ex's who disregard the health and welfare of their children
ought to be taught the same lesson.

Differentiate "won't pay" and "can't pay". For those who are trying,
it just makes the problem worse. The kids are the ones who end up
suffering the most. Supposedly, we're trying to avoid that.

--
Whose cruel idea was it to put an 's' in the word lisp?

"Pamela" wrote in message
hlink.net...
I never respond to this stuff, but you know, I don't think taking a
person's
license for failure to provide for his children is extreme.

I have an ex who has not paid child support for years, may see his
daughter
whenever he wants, makes a great income, and cheats and steals his way
through life.

OK, try this one for size (mind the subtle sarcasm).. NCP -can't- pay the
ordered amount because it's way more then the NCP earns (include the fact
that the economy sucks and NCP has had little luck in retaining work in the
profession of choice). Because of the already existing restrictions placed
upon NCP, NCP can't see the children much beyond every few months. NCP
makes just barely enough to cover -basic- expenses (food, gas, phone,
etc..), so there's very little left over for yachting excisions to the
Mediterranean with Trophy Wife/Husband #5...

Taking his driver's license away seems a rather amusing way to wake him
up.
More I think about it, the more I like it.

I find the idea of license suspension hardly amusing at all. How is this in
the best interest of any NCPs children? How does this help CSE get what
they want, that being the NCPs wallet/purse?

We teach our children that there are consequences to what we do. Perhaps,
ex's who disregard the health and welfare of their children ought to be
taught the same lesson.

The same can (and often is) said of CSE agencies that overstep their
bounds - but far too often hide from their actions with "I was only
following orders"...