Government "Licensing"

[HappyChristian]

BUT it does NOT guarantee our right to travel by car or plane! You can walk! You can use public transportation! Buy a horse and buggy!

That was my point...if the people of the state don't fight it, the state has the right to regulate drivers of vehicles.

[Colin Stolzer]

The states do have that right...and if the people don't like it, we have the power to do something about it ~ vote 'em out and put in the ones who will uphold the Constitutions (plural, because each state has their own).

Not concerning drivers licenses, not anymore the Federal real Id act gives the states until 2010 to implement the federal drivers license in all states. A handful of state have passed legislation refusing to comply due to the expense and the federal gov't has responded with "then your residents cannot board any form of commercial transportation" (paraphrased). That sounds like federal gov't licensing over the states and restriction of travel to me.

The question you should ask yourself is were do you draw the line, Lets say you have a SSN and that then gets turned into the Real ID card, then the Gov't in a few years decides that's "not secure enough" now they want to implant a chip in you for "your own protection" will you take the chip? Or do you consider that to be the mark of the beast? Were do you draw the line?

C

[sarcrew]

You ladies both miss the point - you can't walk or ride on a freeway!!!!!!!
It's illegal!!!!
Wayne

[Pastorj]

The mark of the beast is not just a number, it is also the requiring of the individual to bow down and worship the antichrist. Praise the Lord, I won't be hear when that happens, I will be in Heaven.

[Anon]

You ladies both miss the point - you can't walk or ride on a freeway!!!!!!!
It's illegal!!!!
Wayne

The whole country is not made of freeways. How did Laura Ingalls get from the East to end up in South Dakota????

And yes, the mark of the beast will occur long after I'm gone and out of here.

[Colin Stolzer]

So both of your stances is it's okay because I won't be here when that happens. Thats a great confidence knowing that because it doesn't affect you it doesn't matter. Well hey homosexuals marrying doesn't affect you personally either so that must be okay to right?
Or what the public school teach doesn't affect anybody that homeschools so thats okay?
Or waging illegal war on foriegn soil doesn't directly affect most people so thats okay?
Do I need to go on?

C

[sarcrew]

Easy she traveled over open land and didn't have too have a wagon license!

Wayne

[Anon]

Easy she traveled over open land and didn't have too have a wagon license!

Wayne

So buy a wagon rather than drive illegally. :lol

[John81]

The point is, where in the constitution does the government have the right to dictate what form of transportation we can and can't use?

[Anon]

The point is' date=' where in the constitution does the government have the right to dictate what form of transportation we can and can't use?[/quote']

Well.... do you think everyone has the right to fly an airplane? How about a spacecraft? How about a formula race car going 150mph down a neighborhood road? What about speed limits? Does the government have the right to dictate our speed? Should we be able to drink beer and drive? Isn't that a personal choice? Where in the Constitution does it say we have to obey any of those rules?

[John81]

By "government" I'm referring to the Feds. The States have the right to govern within their own borders on such matters if the people allow it.

However, the Feds have used bully tactics in order to force States to comply with de facto federal law. Anyone recall how the Feds forced the States to enact and enforce the 55 MPH speed limit? That's just the most well-known case. The Feds use this tactic constantly to force their will and their dictates upon the States and the people.

[Anon]

By "government" I'm referring to the Feds. The States have the right to govern within their own borders on such matters if the people allow it.

However, the Feds have used bully tactics in order to force States to comply with de facto federal law. Anyone recall how the Feds forced the States to enact and enforce the 55 MPH speed limit? That's just the most well-known case. The Feds use this tactic constantly to force their will and their dictates upon the States and the people.

Oh I see. Yes now I get it. Driving a car without a license definitely solves THIS problem. :roll

[Colin Stolzer]

Well.... do you think everyone has the right to fly an airplane? How about a spacecraft? How about a formula race car going 150mph down a neighborhood road? What about speed limits? Does the government have the right to dictate our speed? Should we be able to drink beer and drive? Isn't that a personal choice? Where in the Constitution does it say we have to obey any of those rules?

Haveing a law in place to restrict any of those activities doesn't stop anyone from doing them. For example I fly ultralight aircraft once in a while without a license (by the way no license is required to flying ultralights in Wyoming could be other states to, I don't know.) The owner of Virgin Industries, can't remember his name, has a privately owned spacecraft project going if I remember right. Having the law in place still doesn't stop people from driving 150 mph in nieghborhoods it applies a consequence if your caught doing it. People drink and drive everyday the law itself does not stop them. Taking away there license does not stop them either people continue to offend. No were in the bible does any of the Laws God wrote force a person to abide by them, it does however promise a consequence for not abiding by them. The question is, Does the Federal Gov't have the power to establish these Law or is it under this countries form of Gov't the responsibility of the States individually?

Some States do not require a DL.

Making more Laws doesn't make people moral or ethical.

C

[JerryNumbers]

What would the United States be like if there were no laws and no consequences for breaking the laws we do have.

Would any of us be safe if there were no laws or consequences?

What state of state does not requite a drivers licenses?

I agree, the federal government has gone to far in forcing states to comply with their ideas.

To walk, ride a bicycle, a horse, a wagon, to work, would it really be feasible for any of you?

[Colin Stolzer]

What state of state does not requite a drivers licenses?

Kansas for one:

8-201
Chapter 8.--AUTOMOBILES AND OTHER VEHICLES
Article 2.--DRIVERS' LICENSES
8-201.

History: L. 1931, ch. 80,