The American Spectator

Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 1.11.11 @ 6:48AM

With a driver's license and a social security card you can go far in this world. By the way, when the time comes for nationalized health care I prefer to get the yellow tag stapled on my right ear, it's more fashionable.

Ned| 1.11.11 @ 11:56AM

Lordy, Bill! Haven't you heard the phrase around the ear-piercing booth in the mall, "Right is wrong." - The reference being, if a non-gay male is going to have one ear ring, which ear should it be punched into... the right ear may be fashionable but it sends the WRONG message!

Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 1.11.11 @ 1:16PM

It would be at the point of a gun. That's the message.

Appleby| 1.11.11 @ 7:12AM

I got a driving licence when I attended university in California, because in California it was proof that one was not an illegal alien from Mars. After I left California I rarely drove, and rented cars when I needed one, and since I arrived here in Kanukistan I have not driven anything and my expired driving license is as useful as last years media card for the racing series I cover. I never really could drive worth a darn, although I have traversed the USA coast to coast and South to North in Ryder Trucks loaded with all my worldly goods. Think of that the next time you see one of those things crossing the Burlington Skyway in a blizzard!

I now have a Permanent Resident Card, a Health Card, and a Passport, all connected to databases. There is little I can do about that.

John Navratil| 1.11.11 @ 8:25AM

Flying out of San Jose about eighteen months ago, I presented my Texas Driver's License (recently expired) along with the paper renewal I had been given when I renewed it. This was not enough ID to present to get me on the plane. My Houston Airport System ID, which I now must have to be able to walk to my plane and involves an FBI background check (which Loughner now reveals is as useless as teats on a boar hog) wasn't acceptable. A MasterCard with my name and no picture was considered acceptable.

I asked the bubble-gum-chewing know-nothing who was responsible for this farce: "If my identity expired with my ID why wouldn't I just quit driving and paying income taxes?" She thought that was funny!

It's long past insane!

Brother John| 1.11.11 @ 9:50AM

I have recent experience dealing with the county Sheriff's office, in which my identity was at issue but my license was expired. 19 months prior, in fact. But, I could present proof that I had actually paid for the renewal - which actually, they liked, but weren't all that interested in seeing.

Seems that once the state has its money, not much else usually matters.

PolishKnight| 1.11.11 @ 11:54AM

John's experience is strange. According to the DMV, the paper extension while waiting for a new ID in the mail should suffice and the bureaucrat should have taken it. The other official ID also should have qualified. You should have escalated the matter to his manager.

Expiration dates for ID's are issued in theory to ensure that people get a new photo. If they're out of date by a week or so, then they should still be valid. In the case of a drivers' license, the dates are also used to ensure the driver has complied with other requirements (such as insurance) but that should have nothing to do with the use of the license as an ID.

At this point, we might as well all get national passports like the commies do in the former USSR. Conservatives have stammered about them but the fact is that we might as well just give in at this point since the current systems encourages identity theft and illegal immigration. How long do we have to shoot ourselves in the foot over a matter of principle?

PaulD| 1.11.11 @ 8:30AM

"At least then, the bearer could take some pride in the same way that a college graduate ... can take pride in a real achievement." That, too, is becoming less and less of an achievement.

HALOMan| 1.11.11 @ 8:38AM

I was serving in the military when I was asked to show ID. I presented my military ID (photo included) and was asked if I had a drivers license, as my military (photo) ID was not acceptable. I informed the curious that I only had a paper NJ drivers license (70s-80s era) that had no photo. Wouldn't you know, it was considered a better form of ID than an active duty military (photo) ID. Go figure.

Ole Sarge| 1.11.11 @ 9:21AM

In Maryland back in 2005, I had to go home and get my passport, because although the MVA website has "military identification card" as a valid form of ID, the "stiffs" in the local MVA would not accept it.

Then again, go to a couple select MVA offices an hour before opening and speak only Spanish and see what happens... Thank-you CASA!

richard ryan| 1.11.11 @ 8:39AM

This is the typical government M.O. Start a program or requirement, get it established, and then it becomes something totally different to suit their needs. Full implementation of electronic medical records will be the end of privacy as we know it. I know very few doctors who view this as a good thing (at least private physicians-most university doctors support it because they are government employees who don't see the cost and couldn't care less). I'm pretty tight-lipped at the doctor's office nowadays-once my private information makes its way into the "database" it is no longer protected, period. Way back when, my records were physically locked in a file, and I trusted him to keep it secure. It is a sad reality which hurts the physician/patient relationship, but it is truly a privacy concern.

Richard Baker| 1.11.11 @ 8:41AM

Regardless, the license is still proof of possessing the minimum capabilities to drive. Call it a rite of passage for 16 year olds on their way to adulthood.

PJ| 1.11.11 @ 8:53AM

"Why do we bother with driver's licenses at all?"

TAXES, my dear, taxes---- in the form of fees to feed inept DMVs & other governmental bureaucracies who are allowed to take cookies from the cookie jar.

That German idea about being in control------ absolutely spot on! I married into a German-American family & they're all a bunch of control freaks but very nice ones. (Hubby has those tendencies too but he's married to me. I along w/our 4 spirited kids keeps his autocratic tendencies in check. )

SonOFSam| 1.11.11 @ 8:59AM

and you all wonder why I refer to the control freaks in the White House as being "ObamaNazis"

MoeBlotz| 1.11.11 @ 9:45AM

The progressives gave us the Social Security number we all had to sign up for and assured our grandparents that it would not be used as an ID. Now we are tracked everywhere we move with the @)#(*$&%?! SS number on our drivers licenses and any other form of gummint ID card we may have. Can we prevent identity theft without such scrutiny?

Havoc| 1.11.11 @ 9:47AM

You nailed me, Mr. Peters: I am one of those left-lane drivers who refuses to pull over just because some self-important twit pulls up behind me (in his Porsche) and flashes his headlights in my rearview mirror. Most of them are such pantywaists that they are affraid to honk or look at me when they pull around - either one!

Once they get to the safety of their offices, they post an semi-anonymous rant ... 'Eric Peters', if true to type, is a pseudonym.

Brother John| 1.11.11 @ 9:56AM

I'll be happy to give you a nasty look if I finally get around you. If you're not overtaking and someone behind you wishes to, you don't belong in the left lane, and you're distorting the free flow of traffic just as government regulations distort a free economy.

As far as the name "Eric Peters" is concerned, there is a man who posts articles at the National Motorists Association website whose writing style is identical, and who has also published a book with a - perhaps even his own! - photograph inside it.

So, as to the false name, Havoc, I can't speak definitively, but I'm satisfied enough that it's real, Havoc.

Havoc| 1.11.11 @ 10:08AM

I think your panties are in a bunch, Brother John.

Ned| 1.11.11 @ 12:06PM

At least in the Peoples Republic of Washington, and just south in good old Oh-Ree-Gone, driving in the left lane unless over-taking is a ticket-able offense. There are signs every few miles announcing to the nitwits camped in the left lane that that lane is to be used for over-taking, and slower traffic is to stay to the left. The self-important bores cruising along at 59 mph need to get over where they belong, so that traffic can proceed unimpeded.

John Navratil| 1.11.11 @ 5:39PM

Havoc,

The only thing you know when someone gets behind you is that he wants to get by. You don't know why and cannot tell if there is some emergency or not.

You have, in your own words of refusal, have demonstrated that you have no interest in letting anyone by. It's called being a road hog. I'm so happy for you that you are proud of that.

Did it ever occur to you that the slowest person is at the head of the pack. That's you! Meanwhile all those people stacking up behind you increases the odds of an accident. Feel good about yourself here, but don't drive in Germany.

You will, however, get the eye-to-eye contact from me.

Chris| 1.11.11 @ 10:10PM

You sound like a model citizen, Havoc. In deference to your superior judgment and flawless character, I'll not only slow down, but I'll get rid of my guns, turn down the stereo, and eat more fiber too. Thanks for your example.

nyfarmer| 1.11.11 @ 9:48AM

During the Regan era SS#'s were required to be linked to the licence for -- the collection of delinquint child support. The STATE assured us that that was the ONLY pupose for that information. Yeah right!!!

Appleby| 1.11.11 @ 11:54AM

In Buffalo in the 19880s the Social Security Cards began to be handed out to babies and were linked to the welfare rolls and school records -- lo and behold, a woman was discovered with 105 phoney dependants!

Joe D.| 1.11.11 @ 10:06AM

Not to burst your bobble but in many states if not all you are required by law to have some proof you are allow to be there. An I think it is a good law since we have problems with so many illegal who think they are allow to be there just because they want or need to be for financial reasons.

Thomas| 1.11.11 @ 10:11AM

What drivel.

In the first place, a DRIVER"S LICENSE establishes the existence of a MINIMUM skill set and knowledge base associated with the practice of operating a motor vehicle. If the public wants higher standards, then by all means petition your state legislature to require a more comprehensive demonstration of motor vehicle handling skills.

But, a driver's license has no bearing on how a person actually OPERATES a motor vehicle. Every driver has to demonstrate that he, or she, knows the basic laws of motor vehicle operation. Then, a large number of them simply drive the way they want, irregardless of the law. Your SmoooVee doing 80 in a snowstorm, Buick in the left lane refusing to move right, double-yellow-crossing, half-blind inattentive Taco-eating Driver Americanus, knows that he is violating the law, he simply doesn't care.

But, that was not what your piece was about. It was simply the rational for your diatribe against state issued identification. Concerning which you have proven that you know little to nothing. In the first place, EVERY state issues identification cards that do not require any testing concerning motor vehicle operations. They are simply a readily identifiable means of identification. In the second, you are only required to produce identification in a very limited number of police contacts, specifically operating a motor vehicle. In all other contacts, while producing official identification makes it easier for a law enforcement officer, or the bank, to know who they are dealing with, it is not required [ for law enforcement contacts].

If you want to live in a world where identification is not required for some things, I think the Unibomber's shack is still for sale.

borninsocal| 1.11.11 @ 2:20PM

WRONG WRONG WRONG. You are required to produce ID ANYTIME a law enforcement officer requests it. I dare you not to. You may think your right but you are going to jail. The charges against you will later be dropped by the assistant DA after they ground you through the justice system grinder for a while just to make sure you got the message. Oh, and its regardless.

Drew| 1.11.11 @ 10:48AM

There two major issues here.

Firstly, it seems not unreasonable, for the benefit (and safety) of society in general that the state require some minimal level of competence, and adherence to traffic laws, before allowing citizens to operate motor vehicles on public highways. And the issuance of driving licenses seems to be about the only practical means of doing so.

The second issue, that of the Drivers License becoming a de facto "internal passport" is a lot less clear cut.

For one thing, most states issue official photo ID cards for those citizens unwilling or unable to obtain drivers licenses. Such state-issued ID cards are, almost without exception, accepted by both government agencies and private businesses in lieu of a drivers license.

But the important thing to remember, is that it is no way MANDATORY that a citizen obtain such a document. Should one choose to travel via taxicab or bus, ride as a passenger in private vehicles, and conduct one's financial dealings solely with cash - then there is little, if ever, a reason to present such a document. One doesn't need an ID card to obtain a credit card, one doesn't need ID to buy a bus ticket, etc. etc.

Now, police do have a right to request identification from citizens under certain circumstances. But almost without exception these arise ONLY when the police have a "reasonable suspicion" that an individual is involved in criminal activity. More to the point, aside from when one is actually operating a vehicle, there is NO legal requirement that one actually carry the document on one's person. The police may detain an individual who refuses to provide ID (when appehended in suspicious circumstances) - but must release the individual once a) they have established identity and/or b) that they are satisfied that no criminal activity has occured.

Obviously, the measure of "reasonable suspicion" is a matter of debate. But fortunately, there are a number of private organizations dedicated to preserving, and fighting for, American's rights in their encounters with the police and other government agencies. The most well-known of these is, of course, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) - an organization, I note in passing, that seems to be regularly demonized and attacked by such "conservative" luminaries as Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Reilly.

Politics makes strange bedfellows. But if one is truly concerned about maintaining the balance between personal liberty and an "over enthusiastic" Government - I'd come down more on the side of the ACLU than on the blowhards of talkradio and Fox News.

Denise| 1.12.11 @ 1:07PM

In NJ, there is indeed such a thing as the "non-driver identification card." So there is an alternative for people who cannot or who choose not to drive. Unfortunately, in practice, this form of ID is a red flag to police and others that there must be a reason a person COULDN'T GET a license or had it suspended (driving under the influence/reckless driving, failure to pay child support, etc.)--even when you're talking about teens and elderly people. So basically you're back to having to have a driver's license, whether you drive or not, for identification purposes, unless you want to be singled out as a potential criminal. I am not for a national ID card, but there does need to be an alternative out there with no stigma attached to it, along with a change of mindset regarding the ability/desire to drive a car as an indicator of mental, physical, or moral soundness.

Josh Marihugh| 1.13.11 @ 4:27PM

This is why I carry an LP (a learner's permit.) I passed my written test with flying colors, but my eyesight is such that I'm not comfortable behind the wheel of a car.

My wife does all the driving, and I carry my LP and use it anywhere and any time a DL is called for.

Rich Angell| 1.11.11 @ 10:52AM

The timing of this article is amazing. Read the article at the webpage http://freegrafton.com/the-sta.....to-travel/ and see what happened to me last week in Keene, New Hampshire, and my plans to stand for my right to travel.

CharlieEcho| 1.11.11 @ 11:53AM

I opt for the ear tag and healthcare. It will be much better than what we otherwise might expect. We treat our cows very well.

Bob Constantine| 1.11.11 @ 12:29PM

Nice article and very accurate I might add.

I commend the commenter above, Rich Angell and ask others to check out the link he provides to
follow his case.

We are indebted to those who seek to protect our freedom. They need and deserve our support...or next it will be OUR ox that is gored.

Pelligrino| 1.11.11 @ 12:50PM

For Drew and others here, a couple of thoughts.

One, the topic as raised by Mr. Eric Peters is EXCELLENT.

The couple of states that I know of (to include really large population ones like Florida and Texas) have abysmal standards for driver testing. If this is some minimum standard, we have set the bar VERY, very dangerously low. Frankly, it is unsafe.

So perhaps this can serve as a catalyst for states to WAKE UP. It is incredibly unsafe out there on the roads, particularly at rush hours or when people are speeding off to their social events and parties at night. And people seem to freely text, eat that burger, smoke, have an iPod plug in one ear (or raucously loud music via CD system) simultaneously.

All this sorrow over Tuscon (yes, rightly so)....but, folks, this happens every fortnight in America as an innocent family gets whacked on our highways. People dead and maimed for life. Are there any state legislators pushing for banning texting with massive fines for those caught?
Due to the immaturity I see everywhere in our society, I’m perfectly willing to take it out on our youth. No driving until 18. Maybe 19 years old. Exceptions our truly rural districts.

We have imbeciles driving. In a lane next to you.

And many of your fellow motorists don't speak your language. No, they don't speak English and are uninterested mostly. So how do they read those traffic and highway signs or the new modern ones with changing messages? The construction ones? The weather ones? How would they understand a weather warnings on the radio?

In Florida you can take the written test in how many different languages....17? 20? More? Texas, Virginia, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York... In one day at a DMV I saw a man doing the test in Serbo-Croatian and then a little girl who appeared to be 14 (I guess 16?) in Vietnamese. Her Vietnamese mom was reading the test to her. Was I really sure they weren’t exchanging the answers? No way to tell.

Mr. Peters is correct. The little card you need to carry (everywhere!) is not a driver's license. That is a misnomer.

Denise| 1.12.11 @ 1:48PM

I used to live in Japan, where the age of majority is 20 and one may obtain a driver's license at age 18--but usually not without a few thousand dollars' worth of driving school and a very difficult test. One must also prove stick-shift capability or the driver's license will note "Automatic Only." Mine did. When I decided to get my Japanese license, they allowed me to ride along for another driver's test on the course. One part of it was an incline before what was supposed to be a railroad crossing. The driver was testing on a stick-shift, of course, and he was required to come to a full stop at the tracks and then proceed--if the car rolled backward AT ALL, he would automatically fail (he passed). I tested in an automatic, and had to do the same course, which included taking an extremely narrow (I mean, one car width, as many neighborhood roads in Japan are) S-curve and two-right-angle turn stretch without scraping against the curbs (which meant automatic failure). I palmed the wheel to do it, but there must not have been any rule against that, because I passed. Higher standards make better drivers, period. Their drunk-driving penalties are draconian by our standards, but guess what--there is very little drunk driving. Also, new drivers must indicate their novice status with a decal on their cars for the first year, and nobody wails about civil rights violations.

Big Tony| 1.11.11 @ 12:59PM

The yokels in Georgia would not accept my Hawaiian drivers licence as proper ID to get a Georgia drivers licence. They wanted a birth certificate (no picture there) or a passport. Wouldn't you know it my passport was expired so it was not acceptable either. I got a new passport from the feds faster than I got the birth certificate from the state of Georgia where I was born.

arcs| 1.12.11 @ 2:01PM

If you can use an expired passport to obtain a new passport, I wonder why you couldn't use it for the GA DL?

PCP Smoker| 1.11.11 @ 1:01PM

"You take a written (now digital) test that Forrest Gump could pass, along with (maybe) a cursory "road" test that takes place in the parking lot of the DMV"

Ever seen females drive? Ever seen female drivers apply make up, text, and drink coffee while driving at 75 mph? Ever seen teenage girls drive? Ever seen them learning to drive?

Keep the bureaucracy. Keep the long lines, the bad pictures and the false sense of security they provide.

JShizzle| 1.11.11 @ 1:39PM

I hate left lane cruisers. The left lane is the show off lane, so if you want to go 10 under the speed limit in your Buick LeSabre on your way to Ryan's Steakhouse for the early bird special...get in the right lane with the other slow pokes!

PCP Smoker| 1.11.11 @ 1:43PM

"The left lane is the show off lane, so if you want to go 10 under the speed limit in your Buick LeSabre on your way to Ryan's Steakhouse for the early bird special."
Classic line and so true about those Buick LeSabre drivers!

KeyCityPatriot| 1.11.11 @ 4:42PM

I recently visited my local Illinois DMV to replace a lost Driver's "License". They asked if I had any form of ID. I presented my Firearm Owners Identification Card, with photo, issued by the Illinois State Police. This was rejected with the comment that they don't accept that form of ID. However, my corporate Home Depot credit card and a $5 fee did the trick and they printed out a copy of my Driver's License. Just sayin'.....

Fallschirmjager in Flecktarn| 1.11.11 @ 5:24PM

Mister Peters, wer ist Christopher Conan? Ein Freund? Oder ist er unbekannt?

fawnpug| 1.11.11 @ 10:22PM

in 2008, the Ca. DMV clerk demanded a birth certificate in addition to my TX. drivers' license. I provided it (issued in Hungary) with a certified translation which was used to verifiy my identity when I became a naturalized citizen. He demanded a US passport. Since it expired in 1994, I gave him my Certificate of Naturalization based on which my passport was issued. He rejected it - and when I pointed out that by the DMV's very own website Cert. of Naturalization is to be accepted, he shrugged and said "passport only". Exasperated, I gave him my passport, expired 14 years ealier - and I got my Ca. drivers' license soon afterward....Give a little man a little power and you have a big problem....

Paul from SA| 1.11.11 @ 10:58PM

I can't imagine life without a valid driver's license.

Pelligrino| 1.11.11 @ 11:08PM

Mr. Peters' main points were two. The second has to do with our overbearing government misusing the document called a 'driver's license.'

Point well taken. Anyone here in the forum NOT have a bar code somewhere on your driver's license?

Probably all 50 states and Puerto Rico, too, by now.

Any of us really have a clue how much data is stored in the bar code?

I bet it is far more than full name, height, weight, eye color, hair color, home address, DOB, and expiration date.

Capt G| 1.12.11 @ 4:04AM

The justification for licensing drivers is that driving is a privilege. I've never heard an adequate explanation for that theory. Walking, biking, riding a horse, rowing or sailing a boat......nope, not a one of 'em considered a privilege apparently sufficient to require licensure.

Given the fact that only a pulse is required to renew the license, the eye exam pretty well covered in the pamphlet, "Driving for the Legally Blind" (don't laugh...your state has one) why should it be required to be renewed at all? One cannot justify it for ID purposes other than the photo, and I've never really understood how I could be a valid person one day but no one identifiable the next day just because of the date on my driver's license.

And with the decline in driver training and licensure, why bother in the first place? The competency level is set so low that we might ask if we could do as well with no training or licenses at all.

The only current reason to require a license is that it gives the state something to take away. In many states they'll try to seize your license for a variety of criminal offenses, none of them driving offenses. Whether it's writing bad checks or getting caught with a kilo of grass, the first sanction is revocation/suspension of the driving license. The only reason I see for it is that, once all obligations are met for the actual criminal act, you''ve done your time, it gives the state another bite of the apple by charging you a driver's license restoration fee...usually about $2000.00.

In many states, the fine for driving with no license is far less than driving with an expired license and an order of magnitude lower for driving on a revoked/suspended driving license. Like Mr. Angell above, and I encourage the reading of his link, you're better off never getting a license. And has anyone ever had their insurance company ask if they were licensed to drive? So the corporation covering financial liability of your driving actions doesn't even care if you've passed the minimum competency test. I'd say that puts paid to the idea that driving is privilege and that the state has a valid vested interest in one's driving competency.

And then there's those driving "points" whose only purpose used to be allowing your insurance company access to an excuse for raising your rates......you don't need point if you're actually in an accident; your insurance company is going to find out soon enough anyway. But now the state has figured out what the insurance companies have know for years; points are a money maker. Used to be in Michigan, 12 points and you were on the curb. Now, get over six points and you go to charm school and are assessed an annual fee to keep your license for as long as you're over six points. The state figures that what's good for insurance company profitability can be equally beneficial to the state's coffers. The whole thing is a rip-off.

I've got the left-land hogging Havoc pegged for a Subaru driver, or perhaps still in Mom's old 240 Volvo. Nice to see that the overwhelming consensus here is that he's an ass, or maybe just German, eh?

Pelligrino| 1.12.11 @ 1:28PM

Capt. G. writes, "The justification for licensing drivers is that driving is a privilege."

Yes, I had those very words spoken to me, "this is a privilege, not a right...." when reapplying just a few years ago for a state driver's license.

While I agree that they should not be handed out as easily as free library cards, I'm not sure about the privilege part.

Try going without driving for even just 2-3 weeks. Particularly in the depths of winter as now or in the heights of summer near 100 degree/78% humidity.

Yes, in downtown Boston, Baltimore, or living in Georgetown and working at Foggy Bottom, you don't need a car or driver's license. Public transport abounds; in good weather one can do much on foot.

Provided that one is:

1. In good health to be so foot-mobile with ease.
2. Not female and young & attractive.
3. Not slight of build and thus an easy mugging target.
4. An excellent bike rider (and your city's terrain is flat) and you have no real concerns that your bike will be stolen.
5. Blessed with a workplace that offers something akin to a locker room where one can easily change attire if a) clothes are drenched from a downpour, or b) clothes are drenched from 1/2 gallon of personal body persperation during the summer months.

I agree with Capt. G. wholeheartedly. The driver's license is not a privilege. IT IS fully NECESSARY to particpate in the daily happenings of life as a US resident.

Again, just try a 2-3 week period of going without driving your personal car.

And if you have children or a senior for whom you have responsibility?

(Again, this obviously does not apply to those in very well structured retirement communities near towns/cities and those living right downtown. But that does not seem to be the case for most Americans.)

FakeEagle| 1.12.11 @ 2:14PM

Privilege, you say? I don't buy that for a minute. What makes driving a privilege, the fact that it's regulated by the government? So is owning a small business, or marriage. Both require that you meet certain criteria and obtain the proper license. So are those privileges, too?

REB| 1.12.11 @ 9:54PM

Okay,take a test,satisfy the state of your (supposed) competence to operate a motor vehicle,then get issued a liesence THAT LASTS FOREVER with no renewal needsed,that might be acceptable,but the fella is right it has nothing to do with driving!
NVCCA is working in the states to change some of these control freak laws,
Oh and the idea that I have to produce ID while out and about and not driving to a cop?...have had it done,have said no and walked away and as of yet havent had to kick an officers butt over it,or had mine kicked,this is still America as long as we stand up to them!

Harrison| 1.13.11 @ 12:14PM

The author has obviously never heard of an Identification card which looks exactly like a Driver's license but, guess what, you don't have the premission to drive!

sans| 1.13.11 @ 4:10PM

You people don't want to take responsibility for anything do you? Somalia is more your taste - no government, plenty of guns, graft and corruption. Stupid people. What I find with people that want free rein to do anything they want without accountability, is that they are GUILTY. You just don't want to be tried for your crimes.

jgo| 1.13.11 @ 7:46PM

While digging about in the law library a little over a decade ago, I ran across a volume by Janet Ruhl and several others, which, to my recollection, said that the driver license in the USA evolved from a simple tax receipt. Proving you'd paid the extortionists their money was the name of the game. At first, it was just a slip of paper to show that the bearer had paid up.

Only later did they add the name, address, description, then the photo, then the finger-print, and started demanding address updates the day you move. It wasn't until the 1930s that US governments suddenly started declaring that "driving is a privilege"... after nearly 9 millennia of people driving as a right.

sokratez| 1.14.11 @ 12:15AM

New York City used to have a very rigorous road test for a license. The city despised cars evn then
--take the subway, hotshot. Maryland's licensing test drive was risibly inadequate. Can't remember Florida's. The big payoff is in the vehicle sales taxes collected and the annual vehicle registration fees. Ensuring public safety has nothing to do any longer with anything government does. Cops' motto should be "Endanger and Master". In Florida, the state highway patrolmen are professional, aren't unionized, and are paid less than less-qualified county and municipal police.

Joe| 1.14.11 @ 5:29PM

This system of license and insurance works so well that only 30,000 people died last year on the roads. No one takes personal responsibility because they have insurance and are not liable beyond that. If you will look at your state's laws you will find that driving is a commercial endeavor. If you are traveling in your personal transportation device you don't need a license or insurance but you are personally liable to travel in a responsible manor.
Please take notice that all of this license business came about in 1933 when your country was taken over by the banks. Your governments are operating under bankruptcy. You don't own your land or your car. You are allowed to use them only with bankers, (government) permission.
Wake up slaves.

Adidas| 8.11.11 @ 5:49AM

is good

العاب| 4.10.12 @ 1:00PM

Keep the bureaucracy. Keep the long lines, the bad pictures and the false sense of security they provide