Posted on 10/11/2010 12:46:11 PM PDT by djf
Alaska respects unlicensed RKBA, but issues permits on demand for out of state use.
GA considered an “enhanced weapons permit” which likewise recognized extra regulation (training, expanded background checks) for out of state acceptance.
In GA, most counties issue license plates only for the $25 tax and for out of state use.
GA could issue permits as voluntary paperwork for the same reasons.
Not having one could also raise driver licensing to a national issue, with an optimistic result of overturning all driver licensing.
“My guess is to negate the voter ID law presently in place.”
Is the photo voter ID also used as a driver’s license?
I thought the voter ID was for everyone whether they drive or not.
For voting in GA, you must have a photo ID - many kinds are accepted. If you can prove (!) you don’t have one, then they will give you a photo voter ID card.
Bobby Franklin is a Republican member of the Georgia House of Representatives, representing District 43.
Franklin has proposed measures...
... that would prohibit all abortions in Georgia...
... the “Constitutional Tender Act”, aims to make gold and silver the only legal tender for payment of debts in the state of Georgia pursuant to Article I, Section 10 of the U.S. Constitution...
... introduced a bill that would tax the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta as it would any other privately owned bank in the state of Georgia...
The drivers license may be used as a photo ID when one goes to vote.
Well I didn’t know anything about the history or authorship of the bill, I just saw references to it and thought it was interesting.
The government doesn't 'own' the roads, the public does.
Not to mention the legal definition of license IS governmental permission.
Well said!
Its sounds, philosophically, very Constitutional and respectful of natural rights and liberty; yet, in truth, everyone IS free to use the public roads (at least most of them) [walk, pull a wagon, ride a bike, etc.)
What no one is “free” to to do is to get behind the wheel of a potentially lethal machine - lethal if used negligently and improperly - without the rest of your fellows having some small degree of belief that you know what you’re doing.
On the other hand, true enough, if you do fail to drive properly or you drive negligently, and property damage or personal injury to someone else occurs, due to your driving, the law is likely to hold you responsible, license or no license - which might be what makes the proposed law correct. Maybe. (I’m on the fence.)
Full disclosure. I was driving, in my teens, years before I was able to obtain a license. What kept me from getting caught was (1)I was too scared to do anything wrong and (2)I was an excellent driver.
Changing what I SAID is something a statist and lib would do. I don’t see parents passing out assault rifles (and I take exception to even the TERM assault rifle) to their kids when they turn 16 but they have no problem chunking them in the seat of the Expedition unsupervised.
I’m sorry I don’t have the IF IT AIN’T IN THE CONSTITUTION IT AIN’T LAW philosophy that you do. I happen to think there is a need for some rules (within reason).
And as to the “horse/wagon weigh more than a Geo...” I haven’t seen a horse and wagon hit 90mph on a city street but I have seen a Geo that’s blown a red light doing that.
Yes, we do now.
OK, could this have unintended consequences with regards to illegals being able to drive?I like any bill that takes away laws against our freedoms BTW.
Probably. But I don't think motor vehicle laws are the way to attack immigration. If they are pulled over for what is now driving without a license, I don't care to slap them with a charge should this bill pass. I'd rather just deport them.
And if they are involved in the commission of an accident, what would them having a license have to do with anything? They should be charged with being here illegally and deported.
So, I don't much care if this "legalizes" illegals driving.
In colonial days, were horse riders licensed? What about those pulling carts? I’m asking, but don’t know...although I’d guess NOT!
And yes, a runaway horse can kill you too.
You say you don't believe in a living, breathing Constitution, but you go on to explain how you believe in a living, breathing Constitution.
Those who don't understand history are doomed to repeat it.
No. Now what is the relevence to the discussion at hand?
Technically the government does not own anything, it holds it in trust for the citizens. However as caretaker of that trust, they regulate the use of those items they hold in trust.
My point was not to argue the symantecs of government ownership, rather to illustrate that regulation of the use of roads does not restrict a person from driving. It only controls driving on the government roads for which they are responsible. Is that an unreasonable function of government?
It would be better that they were not able to get a DR LIC.That would prevent them from overwelming the system as they have done so with california.
We’re all dealing with hypotheticals here since this won’t pass, but if we did away with drivers’ licenses, we’d do away with driving without a license.
It’s like gun control: illegals are going to drive anyway. Why penalize other Americans with the government red tape (and $$$)? Just crack down on existing laws (being here illegally).
Your argument is valid; thus in my mind the debate falls down on what is an acceptable function of government regulation.
Judging by the Articles of Confederation, the founding fathers did not find that regulation of travel was an acceptable function of government, and felt that it was so obvious, it didn’t need to be incorporated in such a document.
I also fall into that category, because as we all know, a government powerful enough to ‘grant you a privilege,’ is powerful enough to revoke it just as easily. And revoking the ability to drive, or travel, is a death sentence on the ability of one to generate an income, as well as function in society, in all but a handful of cities.
But it’s clear which side of the debate won - all 50 states regulate this ‘privilege.’
I dont disagree with you.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.