I enjoyed celebrating your landslide victory with you at Sammy and Nicks.
I write this letter to ask you to seriously consider the dangers of a bill
that was communicated to the House last Thursday.
Senate Bill 62 requires each applicant for a driver's license to supply
a thumbprint or other biometric identifier at the discretion of the Commissioner.
The biometric identification information will be accessible on the driver's
license via smart card media.
This may seem to you really weird but I want you to hang in there, read through what I am saying and try to understand my situation.
I have been on record since 1994 as being absolutely convinced that the mark on the right hand as described in Revelation Chapter 13 is not a tattoo but is instead the thumbprint. It was also obvious as I came to understand that the retina scan serves as the mark on the forehead and finally that your human barcode (DNA) is the number of a man. From that time forward I searched to understand whether or not the Social Security Number was then the number of the beast. I am fully convinced the SSN is the number of the beast. From the time of my conviction, I have been disassociated with Social Security and have been prohibited from identifying with such a number. Because of this, my 17 year Navy career ended against my will, I cannot obtain a bank account, I no longer own a house, I can't get a job and many other negative things. Banks will not cash a check written to me because I cannot comply with their requirement to give the mark on my right hand (thumbprint). Now, with Senate Bill 62, I will not be able to own or drive a car. Many people tell me my theology is in error but I continue to plead, "prove my theology wrong by securing my liberty."
With SB 62, the commissioner can decide whether he wants to use fingerprints, retina scans, DNA or any other biometric thing depending on the technology available and the budget he is provided with. I am not sure about this but this whole scheme is probably some kind of federal mandate that they could not enforce against me by their own power due to their Constitutional limitations.
Beyond my religious prohibitions:
1. What does biometric identification have to do with whether or not
I can safely operate a motor vehicle?
2. I thought the government was supposed to presume me innocent rather
than presuming me a deadbeat dad.
3. I thought the government was supposed to presume me innocent rather
than presuming me a felon.
4. I thought the government was supposed to presume me innocent rather
than presuming me a runaway criminal.
5. Since when is a license to do a particular thing supposed to become
a (passport) necessary to do things which should naturally be lawful and
necessary for life and happiness?
You don't have to be a prophet to figure out:
If you can't do the number of the beast (SSN), mark of the beast (fingerprint/retina scan), or number of a man (DNA), you can't get a passport giving you permission to live (State Driver's License/I.D. Card). If you have no passport (State Driver's License/I.D. Card)? You can't: get a bank account; job; cash a check or money order; travel by air; bus or train; use a credit or debit card. etc....
Once you imbed this information on the life passport, you will then
present the card to show your identity. The card will be placed in a reader,
and then you will provide the mark on your right hand (or other biometrics
i.d.) to prove you are the person identified on the card. Then you may
proceed to get a job, drive a car, ride the plane, cash the check, use
the ATM, receive your SOCIAL SECURITY entitlement.....
This is a very convenient New World Order Utopia but it is absolutely
prohibited by the word of God. Our tendency to deny the obvious is due
to our tendency to make our theology conform to the path of least difficulty
(a CARNAL survival instinct)
Somebody needs to bring this point up and write a law which prohibits
Virginia from participating in this scheme. Otherwise Virginia's touted
virtues established by our founding fathers will be extinct.
At the very least, for the sake of me, my family, and those of our religious class, have something established on the record that requires the commissioner to not enforce the requirement on those who are prohibited from compliance on the basis of a bonafide religious conviction. There is a statement in the statute 46.2-323 which states "The Commissioner may, on a case-by-case basis, waive any provision of such regulations for good cause shown." But so far, the Commissioner does not sense any real obligation to apply this provision (my letter to Commissioner Holcomb is attached).
I wish you the best. I encourage you to make sure you are making good and right laws. There will be great temptation upon you to write laws which are expedient rather than right.
God bless you,
David Alan Carmichael