Replies

Summer, see reply number 305. The only reason everyone is convinced that conducting oneself on the public roads using one's private property is a privelege instead of a right is because we've been systematically duped over the decades by governments who reap billions of dollars in licensing revenues from this deception.

Did George Washington need to get a riders' license and a set of tags for his horse's rump in order to conduct himself on the public roads using his private property (his horse)? Nope. What has changed since then? Certainly not the Constitution in this regard.

Re your post #325 and your post #305 -- But I think in your post #305 you actually provided the legal grounds as to why she DOES need to comply with FL state law in the subject regard:

...only so far restrained as the Rights of others may make it necessary for the welfare of all other citizens.

I think it would an unnecessary burden on society -- especially a police officer who may pull her over and try to determine if SHE is actually the person on the license.

Because as you know, someone else may actually be using her license.

Who knows all the friends of this woman? What if she hangs out with terrorists? I'm not saying she does -- but do you know for sure she doesn't? Also -- can you guarantee that her license info will never be stolen by terrorists, as it seems to me they would just LOVE this kind of no-photo license to carry around for their female suicide bombers!

Consequently, for many reasons, I don't think she has a leg to stand on here.

My welfare as a citizen depends on that cop being able to do his or her job. If FL issued licenses her way, that cop has no way of knowing who he or she actually pulled over. She is the one who needs restrained in this matter. Not the cop.