John 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 I was nothing but a hot head not worthy of listening to. Now, since that has failed, he is attempting to use sophistry, seemingly knowledgeable, but subtly deceptive reasoning or argumentation, relying on the fact that most people won't be able to distinguish his deception, and will simply trust him since it all "sounds" so knowledgeable.
In doing so, he would try to convince readers that:
A Right OF Speech is not a Right TO Speak
that
A Right OF Travel is not a Right TO Travel
and that
Driving is a Right 2551jaybird And, Driver Licensing Laws would presume to deny us our Right of Transit Ordinarily used for...
A Right OF Free Transit is not a Right TO Freely Transit
But, indeed
A Right OF Speech IS a Right TO Speak.
A Right OF Travel IS a Right TO Travel
and
A Right OF Free Transit IS a Right TO Freely Transit
There are those in America who would use it for their own purposes and greed. Do not fall for their tricks.
We do Indeed have the Right of Transit Ordinarily used for Personal Travel at our own Inclination on our Public Highways.
