June 30, 1934 - Editorial - Uncle Sam Can't Do it All, by George Lorimer
In the first place, there has been no such increase in deaths among school children as among adults, due in part to the training and discipline of children in school and to school patrols. In the second place, states with drivers'-license laws administered by strong central authority show a much better record than do states without such laws. In the third place, there has been no such increase in accidents among commercial-vehicle drivers as among non-commercial drivers, the former presumably being under greater discipline and control. In the fourth place, rural fatalities exceed those in urban areas by three to two; there being greater control of city than of rural traffic.
In the past four years a number of states have accepted the drivers'-license law and other legislation based on the Uniform Vehicle Code. But there are many states and municipalities still far behind in these matters, and without anything like adequate social control of the actions of individual vehicle drivers and pedestrians. (pg. 22)
Comment: At one time in America, there were no drivers license requirements. It was the concern for public safety that brought drivers license laws into being. The Constitution is supposed to guarantee to people the right of locomotion, which means that you can travel anywhere in the country as long as you do so in a manner that does not endanger other motorists. But what has happened is that the drivers license laws have been used to destroy the right of locomotion and replace it with a privilege granted by the state. In other words, when you look at your drivers license, assuming the state has let you have one, you are looking at a privilege and not a right. This is a badge of slavery, for all people throughout history who were in a condition of servitude had no right of locomotion. If slaves could not produce permission from their masters that they were legally permitted to travel the public roads, they were in violation of the law and therefore a criminal. I cannot see why it was necessary to destroy the right of locomotion with the drivers license laws. Requiring people to be a certain age and pass certain driver's competency tests does not destroy the right, it merely asserts that the person is now qualified to exercise his/her right to drive an automobile. If the person abuses their right then legal remedies can be applied which will take their right of locomotion away, replace their right with a state privilege, and place them under strict police regulations. For example, let's say someone driving drunk hurts someone in an accident. A criminal statute allows police to charge the person. The person goes to trial and is found guilty. Once the person is criminally convicted, then they can be stripped of their right and forced to accept a state granted privilege. In other words, the people who obey the rules of the road and exercise their right of locomotion in a safe manner will retain their right, while the people who do not obey the rules of the road thus endangering the safe drivers can have their right taken from them in criminal proceedings. This is what the 13th amendment does. It allows slavery or involuntary servitude to be imposed only if the person is found guilty of crime. To strip people of their rights simply by passing laws and then using the police power to enforce those laws circumvents this constitutional provision. Sadly, in this day and time, this is done on a massive scale.