You actually have a right to travel as a citizen of the US, and more logically as a human right.
You are permitted to travel anywhere you like that isn't marked as private property at your leisure with your method of transportation choice, provided that transportation choice is privately owned and not causing damage or harms, and you're traveling for a non-commercial purpose.
The only reason cars have licence plates and titles is because it transfers the vehicle to being owned by the state, which removes your freedom to travel because its no longer a private vehicle at that point. It's a dirty trick to infringe on rights, but it's generally easier to simply play along with them than support your right to travel, which requires an un-registered privately owned vehicle to do legally.
If you are not using your vehicle for commercial purposes, and you own your vehicle (meaning you didn't give it to the state in exchange for a certificate of "legal" title (which means the state owns the physical vehicle, you're just responsible for it), then you have a right to travel, and need no registration or insurance or drivers licence etc. You don't have the right to harm anyone or anything with your vehicle, but you do have the right to travel. Over the years there have been a number of folks who actually took the effort to enforce it. Charlie Sprinkle was one of the later ones, and he did it for 35 years, and got a number of state laws repealed in CA and other states that were clear violations of your right to travel.
Some info on Charlie:http://ticketslayer.com/ts/rt2travel/ts ... page_1.htm
Info on registering your vehicle etc:
" no state can require a driver's license to travel in a private vehicle. As we shall see, driver licenses are only for commercial purposes. Everyone has a right to travel on public roads, yet no one has a right to use public roads to make a profit.
A license plate is proof that the government owns the car. A "Certificate of Title" is not a title. A Certificate of Title is a statement by the owner stating that title exists. Those who have overthrown your government now own "your" car. Unfortunately, you exchanged ownership of the vehicle for the plates that they force you to put on their car. "
Travel within the United States
As early as the Articles of Confederation the Congress recognized freedom of movement (Article 4), though the right was thought to be so fundamental during the drafting of the Constitution as not needing explicit enumeration..
In United States v. Wheeler, 254 U.S. 281 (1920), the Supreme Court reiterated its position that the Constitution did not grant the federal government the power to protect freedom of movement. However, Wheeler had a significant impact in other ways. For many years, the roots of the Constitution's "privileges and immunities" clause had only vaguely been determined. In 1823, the circuit court in Corfield had provided a list of the rights (some fundamental, some not) which the clause could cover. The Wheeler court dramatically changed this. It was the first to locate the right to travel in the privileges and immunities clause, providing the right with a specific guarantee of constitutional protection. By reasoning that the clause derived from Article IV of the Articles of Confederation, the decision suggested a narrower set of rights than those enumerated in Corfield, but also more clearly defined those rights as absolutely fundamental.
But the Supreme Court began rejecting Wheeler's reasoning within a few years. Finally, in United States v. Guest, 383 U.S. 745 (1966), the Supreme Court overruled Chief Justice White's conclusion that the federal government could protect the right to travel only against state infringement.