ATLANTA — A state lawmaker from Marietta is sponsoring a bill that seeks to do away with Georgia driver’s licenses. State Rep. Bobby Franklin, R-Marietta, has filed House Bill 7, calling it the “Right to Travel Act.” In his bill, Franklin states, “Free people have a common law and constitutional right to travel on the roads and highways that are provided by their government for that purpose. Licensing of drivers cannot be required of free people, because taking on the restrictions of a license requires the surrender of an inalienable right.”
Franklin told CBS Atlanta News that driver’s licenses are a throw back to oppressive times. “Agents of the state demanding your papers,” he said. “We’re getting that way here.” CBS Atlanta’s Rebekka Schramm asked Franklin, “How are we going to keep up with who’s who and who’s on the roads and who’s not supposed to be on the roads?”
“That’s a great question,” Franklin said. “And I would have to answer that with a question, ‘Why do you need to know who’s who?’”“What about 12-14-year-olds who want to drive? What would stop them?” Schramm asked. “Well, what’s stopping them now anyway?” Franklin answered.
But not all drivers are on board with the lawmaker’s idea. “I think people should be qualified in some way to drive,” Susan Cotton said. “It’s kind of dumb. We need to focus on more important things. The system is working,” Sheriyar Sarkari said.
Source.
Actually, I thought he had a point with that question- “What’s stopping them now?”
TrueblueNZ 
8 responses to “No Drivers Licenses- Would Mr. Joyce Approve?”
Hmmm, a better first step would be to repeal seat belt and helmet laws… Too big a leap for those unfamiliar with freedom initially…
LikeLike
Shit NZ is half way there already with partially qualified/non licensed drivers might as well go the whole hog.
Still the income stream has to be protected I guess.
LikeLike
I’ll be interested when they introduce a bill to do away with tax, meanwhile I see that lawmakers in South Dakota want legislation forcing all adults turning 21 to acquire a firearm. I’m all for firearms but this is plainly mad and unconstitutional. They jumped up and down when Barry forced them to buy health insurance and this has been deemed unconstitutional , what’s the difference with what SD are trying?
LikeLike
Apparently freedom loving SD didn’t get the memo that force is force…
A Constitutional right also implies the right not to exercise that right if one chooses…
LikeLike
bob: From the statements I’ve read from the sponsors of the bill in question, they don’t expect it to pass. Rather, they are trying to explicitly draw a parallel with the health insurance mandate, i.e. “if you think forcing people to buy guns is ridiculous, how is forcing them to buy health insurance any less ridiculous?”
LikeLike
Source for that claim:
Rep. Hal Wick, R-Sioux Falls, is sponsoring the bill and knows it will be killed. But he said he is introducing it to prove a point that the federal health care reform mandate passed last year is unconstitutional.
LikeLike
Requiring citizens to have firearms for a legitimate purpose – such as defence, a’ la the Swiss is more acceptable, but a legislator requiring a free citizen to have a gun because the legislator likes guns is force and anti-freedom… Don’t confuse them… There is also a difference between what is Constitutionally legal and morally acceptable…
I like gun ownership, I think it is a good thing and there should be more of it throughout the Western World, but wouldn’t force my views on others…
LikeLike
National Defence is a legitimate area of government organisation but I don’t see any reason to force people who don’t like or want guns to have them outside of this…
I agree with Libertarians on lots of points, a used to agree with them more… I like to keep an open mind and react to accurate information… I may became more Conservative as time passes, that seems to have been the trend of the last 4 years since I became interested in politics…
LikeLike