See, here's the way it works in a debate.
Any argument left unchallenged is allowed to stand. Saying "see the rules" is not a rebuttal. Saying "See rule 1.2(a)(i) is."
I made the argument and provided my sources. You now have the opportunity to rebut... or not, your choice.
Falls
Its been a long time since I was in debate class however let me give it a try... First off, no one ever graduated from debate class by stating
You're wrong.... At least not any debate class that I graduated from. So I will expect you to opine a bit more so has to support your claim of "you're wrong"
I will support my arguments with Constitutional Case law precedent of which, I believe the United States Constitution trumps your Virginia statute and NJ title 39 argument.
Starting with the simplest to understand..
1- " Where activities or enjoyment,natural and often necessary to the well being of an American Citizen, such as Travel, are involved, we will construe narrowly all delegated powers that curtail or dilute them... to repeat, we deal here with a Constitutional right of a citizen"
Edwards v California, 314 US 160 (1941)
2- " Undoubtedly the right to 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 Constitution"
Schactman v Dulles, 96 APP D.C. 287,293
3-" No statutory duty lies to apply for, or to possess a drivers license for personal travel and transportation as dependent is not within the " Class of persons for whose benefit or protection the statute was enacted"
Routh v Quinn 20 Cal 2D 488
4-" Those things which are considered as" Inalienable Rights" which all citizens possess cannot be licensed since those acts are not held to be a Privilege"
City of Chicago v collins 51 N.E. 907, 910
Falls, something else for you to ponder.. " A law repugnant to the constitution is VOID"-- Justice John Marshall...
I guess you think he was wrong too...
If you intend to come to a debate on law, I suggest you have some legal precedent to assist you in arguing your points..
I look forward to future mooting..
Best regards.
CCJ