[Kaiminani]

Originally Posted by airics

Remember driving is NOT a right, it is a privilege.

That is a terribly wrong-headed philosophy. In the USA, government does not grant privileges, it only restricts rights when there is a compelling reason to do so. One might just as well say that walking on public streets is not a right but a privilege too.

As long as there is no effort to verify the identity of drivers each time they enter the public roadways the argument that extremely strong identification standards to obtain a license are necessary for highway safety purposes is not particularly compelling.

The idea that driving is a right is not only prima facie but also supported by case law, here's some examples:

"The use of the highway for the purpose of travel and transportation is not a mere privilege, but a common fundamental right of which the public and individuals cannot rightfully be deprived."
--Chicago Motor Coach v. Chicago, 169 NE 221.

"The right of the citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, either by carriage or by automobile, is not a mere privilege which a city may prohibit or permit at will, but a common law right which he has under the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."
--Thompson v. Smith, 154 SE 579.

"The right to travel is a part of the liberty of which the citizen cannot be deprived without due process of law under the Fifth Amendment."
Kent v. Dulles, 357 US 116, 125.

"The right to travel is a well-established common right that does not owe its existence to the federal government. It is recognized by the courts as a natural right."
--Schactman v. Dulles 96 App DC 287, 225 F2d 938, at 941.

[Tymberwulf]

Originally Posted by Kaiminani

That is a terribly wrong-headed philosophy. In the USA, government does not grant privileges, it only restricts rights when there is a compelling reason to do so. One might just as well say that walking on public streets is not a right but a privilege too.

As long as there is no effort to verify the identity of drivers each time they enter the public roadways the argument that extremely strong identification standards to obtain a license are necessary for highway safety purposes is not particularly compelling.

The idea that driving is a right is not only prima facie but also supported by case law, here's some examples:

"The use of the highway for the purpose of travel and transportation is not a mere privilege, but a common fundamental right of which the public and individuals cannot rightfully be deprived."
--Chicago Motor Coach v. Chicago, 169 NE 221.

"The right of the citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, either by carriage or by automobile, is not a mere privilege which a city may prohibit or permit at will, but a common law right which he has under the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."
--Thompson v. Smith, 154 SE 579.

"The right to travel is a part of the liberty of which the citizen cannot be deprived without due process of law under the Fifth Amendment."
Kent v. Dulles, 357 US 116, 125.

"The right to travel is a well-established common right that does not owe its existence to the federal government. It is recognized by the courts as a natural right."
--Schactman v. Dulles 96 App DC 287, 225 F2d 938, at 941.

One small problem with your argument here, nowhere does it say right to travel via personal automobile. All it states is that the individual has the right to travel via highway. Other than Thompson v Smith, which is most likely outdated since it is taking about traveling by carriage!

[swagger]

Originally Posted by kingfish22

I hope you don't take this the wrong way...but here goes.
The whole mess could have been avoided by just reading and following TO THE LETTER exactly what they require at the motor vehicle website.

I transferred my NY license with no problem at all.
One trip.

Ditto here. Well, technically it was two trips, because they didn't transfer the motorcycle endorsement and I had to go back the next day to have them fix it, but it was a simple mistake - I brought what I was supposed to, and walked out with my license.

Nevada DMV New Resident Guide

[yellowsnow]

Originally Posted by airics

same issue happened to my wife.. getting a replacement is no big deal.. call the county that you were married in... had ours in 3 days... cost $2

They think it was destroyed in a flood in the 80's. No copy available.

[airics]

wow.. no microfiche or anything? how about a document from a church???

[sdreloc]

Originally Posted by yellowsnow

They think it was destroyed in a flood in the 80's. No copy available.

Wow, super irresponsible of them. Did not Xerox machines and offsite storage of copies exist in the 80's?

[Kaiminani]

Back then we were still fighting the cold war and the country prided itself on not needing identity papers - that was for commies. So its no surprise they weren't given a very high priority.

[Buzz123]

Originally Posted by kingfish22

Proof of Identity & Social Security Number

Those are the same documents required for just about anything in the U.S., and they aren't Nevada's rules, they are the Federal government's. Since the early 1980's, all employers in the U.S. have been required to place copies of those same required documents into your personnel file. So it should be no surprise by now, and no big deal to have those handy. It may not be fair, constitutional, or convenient, but it has been law since before some of you were born. A responsible person would make sure they took good care of those documents and could provide them.

In the times I was transferred to other states, I had to get DL and registration there, and then when I returned, had to get Nevada DL and registration. In all the times I've done this, including the year I arrived here with a West Virginia DL that I had forgotten to renew, I have never seen a reason to throw such a hissy as some newbies do. I'm sure all they are doing is making sure we know what a horrible state we live in and how wonderful the state is that they came from, but for some strange reason, they just had to get out of.

Funny isn't it? You'd think they would just go back to where they came from if Nevada doesn't meet their standards, but they won't do that, will they? They just run around letting everone know how stupid we are for living in Paradise.

[Buzz123]

Originally Posted by jjameson922

I've had it worse than Yellowsnow. This week will be my THIRD attempt at the BMV. Men can be snide about it; they don't have to provide a continuous paper trail with documents to support every name change. The BMV has been very nice with me about all of this and explained it is because of Homeland Security. What I want to know is, why hasn't anyone else experienced this nonsense in other states since 9-11?

I agree it is a little harder for women when they get married to show proof of the name change, but Homeland Security (what a commie─or Nazi?─ sounding name that is) has nothing to do with it. It's been that way for a lot longer than 2001. We were married in Mexico in 1983, and my wife had to provide proof to the DMV, the IRS, Soc. Sec., and her employer where she had security clearances, that she was now a Mrs. We laughed about the copies of our marriage license, and the wedding certificate, that we sent them. It was all in Spanish, and even we couldn't read them.

BTW, is BMV and new name for the DMV?

[Kaiminani]

Originally Posted by Buzz123

Those are the same documents required for just about anything in the U.S.

Now that's an overstatement if I ever heard one. I haven't needed to produce such documents for anyone for at least a decade, I doubt I'm in the minority either.

I'm sure all they are doing is making sure we know what a horrible state we live in and how wonderful the state is that they came from, but for some strange reason, they just had to get out of.

Its all a conspiracy to deliberately insult you for living here.