John Gaquin
You really don't know how to respond, you can't counter what I say, so you lower yourself by resorting to Ad Homimens, or Personal buttults. Read the quote again. It speaks of our Right "to remove from one place to another" and it speaks of our Right of "free transit". Clearly, those are both definitions of a verb. And, "Driving an Automobile" is the definition of a verb as well.
Driving is a Right 2550John Gaquin began this debate by issuing Ad Hominems, Personal buttults, against his judgment of my knowledge, in the hopes that I would blow up on him, so that he could convince you readers that...
"Undoubtedly the right of locomotion, the right to remove from one place to another according to inclination, is an attribute of personal liberty, and the right, ordinarily, of free transit from or through the territory of any state is a right secured by the 14th Amendment and by other provisions of the Consbreastution." - Williams v. Fears, 179 U.S.
If "free transit" were, as you suggest, a noun, then today, that would mean we have a Right to Free Cars. And 150 years ago, it would have meant we have a Right to Free Horses. But, there use of "free" does not mean "without charge". The phrase "free transit" means "freedom of transit" or "transit without obstruction".
Driving is a Right 2549Yes, yes, of course. There are many words that can be used as more than one word form - but not arbitrarily and not simultaneously. Tree, table, file, monitor...
Hahahahaha!!! So, should I be thrown in prison for reading legal documents? Your responces are becoming absurd and Ad Hominem in nature. I blew your argument out of the water, and you resort to personal buttults.
