Question for those that oppose requiring a photo ID for voting

[ladyliberal]

Firearms are not licensed (yet), although some classes of firearms dealers must acquire a license. To date, we still (fortunately) do not have an official firearms registry, although the requirement of dealers to indefinitely maintain the Form 4473 filled out at the time of purchase constitutes a de-facto registry.

Good point. I suppose I should have said "licensing to bear firearms", rather than "licensing for firearms", the latter suggesting that it is the firearm rather than the person to which the license pertains.

 

[daveman]

It has not been shown by anyone anywhere that people are voting fraudulently in such a way that voter ID is the BEST or ONLY way to fix the problem. Every case of voter fraud that is cited is best fixed by repairing existing voter registration requirements.

For some reason, this very uncomplicated point is not capable of penetrating some very thick skulls.

Instead, they throw out logical fallacies about gun control.

It's all very bizarre. But that's what unsupported paranoia about imaginary problems does to you.

The Supreme Court itself has said this is an imaginary problem.

So go figure. Whack-A-Mole. Enjoy. But just remember, you can't argue with someone who does not know they are beaten. Waste of time.

How do you know the person voting is the person who registered?

None of you have ever answered that question.

The IRS has never asked me for my id, yet I've received thousands of dollars in tax returns from them. How do they know I'm not someone else claiming tax returns under a name that isn't mine? The biggest way they can tell is that only one return with my name and SSN on it is submitted! If two showed up, they would know there is a problem. A fingerprint on ballot could catch double votes.


There are only two categories of adults in this nation that may not vote - felons (in some states) and people who are not citizens - neither of which has any real motive to vote illegally. Its not a crime that pays, at all! You're risking years in prison or deportation to your home country - and the return on your risk is almost zero.

And you still haven't answered the question.

As for illegal aliens...they get drivers' licences and SS cards all the time. Illegally.

You don't have a valid argument.

 

[candycorn]

Do you support the requirement that people show a photo ID to buy a gun?

yes

If so, how then can you oppose the same requirement in order to vote?

a) You can't kill anyone with a vote
b) being denied the opportunity to purchase a weapon because of an administrative issue doesn't silence your voice in government like being denied the right to vote for the same reason.
c) far more people have been illegally killed by people with guns than have illegally cast votes.


Though I would support a fingerprint on the ballot approach that would allow authorities to identify when someone has voted twice.

That is a good example of highlighting the difference in the two questions. Although I disagree with example A. You can, actually kill someone with your vote. Not directly. but certainly indirectly.

Again, the democratic chair of West Palm Beach County, Florida approved the butterfly ballot that was used in th 2000 election. As a result of this confusing and bizarre voting device, Pat Buchanan received a lot of votes that were supposed to have gone for Al Gore. Gore, of course, ended up losing to George W. Bush by 500 votes or something like that. This isn't about the 500 votes being, perhaps, fraudulent but if they were...well there you are. This is about 90 days later.

Then 9/11 happened in 2001.

If we had Gore in the White House, we, I am confident, would have gone into Afghanistan. I'm equally as confident that we would not have gone into Iraq.

As a result of Bush's misadventure in Iraq, we lost 4,000 plus soldiers.

Place the blame where you want...

The derelict Party chair in WPBC,
The citizens who couldn't figure out how to vote,
Clinton's justice department's handling of Elian Gonzalez
Monica
Pat Buchanan's 3rd party insurgency
Ralph Nader
Or even President George W. Bush who, I am confident, did what he thought was right as to the oath of his office. I can't fault him for that but how you decide to give up on Afghanistan and invade Iraq long before your primary mission is over is rather dunce-like from a commander in chief's point of view.

The bottom line is that if Gore was elected, we would very likely have 4,000 more soldiers still among us. The reason Gore wasn't elected is because someone didn't take their vote seriously.

There is no logical reason for not wanting to have a sterile election process when the solution is falling-off-a-log easy.

 

[M14 Shooter]

[
Of course different rights deserve different protection.

There is no sound basis for this statement.

ALL constitutionally protected fundamental rights enjoy the protection of and by strict scrutiny, where the state must show a compelling interest for the restriction, and the restriction in question is the least restrictive means of achieving that interest.

In this, right to vote is no different than the right to arms.

When I said requiring identification was to be avoided, I didn't mean it should never be done. I meant that it should not be done without good reason. As I said earlier, I believe there is a good reason when purchasing a gun- because guns are dangerous in certain hands.

And there is good reason to verify the ID of s prospective voter, as prevously noted, one that exceeds the good reason to verify the ID of a prospective gun buyer.

Again, I'd like to see how you quantify the reduced efficacy of your vote from fraudulent votes.

Again - it -should- be obvious.
If anyone can cast a vote in someone elses' name, everyone's right to vote has been harmed - again, the most basic pronciple of the right to vote is that each person casts his own vote; the state has a compelling interest to see that this is the case.

If certain individuals obtain firearms, it absolutely affects the ability of others to obtain firearms.

Not in in the same context - but you knew that, which is why you changed the context.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Do you support the requirement that people show a photo ID to buy a gun?

yes

If so, how then can you oppose the same requirement in order to vote?

a) You can't kill anyone with a vote

But, when you allow someone to cast a vote under someone else's name, you harm -eveyone- by diminishing -everyones- right to vote.

b) being denied the opportunity to purchase a weapon because of an administrative issue doesn't silence your voice in government like being denied the right to vote for the same reason.

No... being denied the opportunity to purchase a weapon because of an administrative issue silences your right to arms.
In both case, the rights are denied by an 'administrative issue'.
So... what's the difference?

c) far more people have been illegally killed by people with guns than have illegally cast votes.

See (a)

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

How do you know the person voting is the person who registered?

None of you have ever answered that question.

The IRS has never asked me for my id, yet I've received thousands of dollars in tax returns from them. How do they know I'm not someone else claiming tax returns under a name that isn't mine? The biggest way they can tell is that only one return with my name and SSN on it is submitted! If two showed up, they would know there is a problem. A fingerprint on ballot could catch double votes.


There are only two categories of adults in this nation that may not vote - felons (in some states) and people who are not citizens - neither of which has any real motive to vote illegally. Its not a crime that pays, at all! You're risking years in prison or deportation to your home country - and the return on your risk is almost zero.

And you still haven't answered the question.

As for illegal aliens...they get drivers' licences and SS cards all the time. Illegally.

You don't have a valid argument.

(bold large font in quote added by me for emphasis)

A) I never said they didn't get driver's licenses and SS cards.
B) If they can get illegal driver's licenses "all the time" how the **** is a voter ID law going to stop them from voting, genius?


In fact - a voter ID law will only penalize those who are legal voters but for whatever reason do not have photo ID, as those willing to vote illegally surely will be willing to make a fake ID, too.


The only reason the Republicans want voter ID laws is because it will disproportionately affect the poor and minority voters. That's a fact.

 

[M14 Shooter]

The only reason the Republicans want voter ID laws is because it will disproportionately affect the poor and minority voters. That's a fact.

That's a FACT?
Well then - you should have no issue proving your claim.
Please begin.

 

[Truthmatters]

come on the studies have been given you fools OVER AND OVER.

you just ignore them

 

[Truthmatters]

Study: South Carolina voter ID law hit black precincts hardest - Mackenzie Weinger - POLITICO.com

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

The only reason the Republicans want voter ID laws is because it will disproportionately affect the poor and minority voters. That's a fact.

That's a FACT?
Well then - you should have no issue proving your claim.
Please begin.

Its sufficient to show it will disproportionately affect minorities.

 

[M14 Shooter]

The only reason the Republicans want voter ID laws is because it will disproportionately affect the poor and minority voters. That's a fact.

That's a FACT?
Well then - you should have no issue proving your claim.
Please begin.

Its sufficient to show it will disproportionately affect minorities.

No, not its not.

You claimed:

The only reason...is because it will disproportionately affect the poor and minority voters...

Show that this is why the Republicans supposedly want this.
Be sure to provide quotes and citations for same.

You said this was a FACT, if you recall.

 

[bripat9643]

come on the studies have been given you fools OVER AND OVER.

you just ignore them

The liberal definition of "study" is "propaganda."

 

[bripat9643]

The only reason the Republicans want voter ID laws is because it will disproportionately affect the poor and minority voters. That's a fact.

That's a FACT?
Well then - you should have no issue proving your claim.
Please begin.

Its sufficient to show it will disproportionately affect minorities.

Wrong. Apparently you think we should repeal laws against armed robbery and murder as well. Those laws also disproportionately affect minorities.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

That's a FACT?
Well then - you should have no issue proving your claim.
Please begin.

Its sufficient to show it will disproportionately affect minorities.

Wrong. Apparently you think we should repeal laws against armed robbery and murder as well. Those laws also disproportionately affect minorities.

No, I don't think that, nor is that apparent. For a law to be racist it must not only affect minorities disproportionately, it must serve no legitimate purpose. since, obviously, anyone willing to cast an illegal vote is also willing to make a fake photo id, the voter id law only serves to restrict the liberties of lawful voters and does nothing to stop unlawful votes.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Its sufficient to show it will disproportionately affect minorities.

Wrong. Apparently you think we should repeal laws against armed robbery and murder as well. Those laws also disproportionately affect minorities.

No, I don't think that, nor is that apparent. For a law to be racist it must not only affect minorities disproportionately, it must serve no legitimate purpose. since, obviously, anyone willing to cast an illegal vote is also willing to make a fake photo id, the voter id law only serves to restrict the liberties of lawful voters and does nothing to stop unlawful votes.

Still waiting for your citations.
I'mm sure you'll again say something to try to avoid giving any - at which point I will remind you that you claimed a FACT and ask again for those citations.

Then, consider your argument, otherwise applied:
Obviously, anyone willing to commit a violent crime is also willing to illegally buy a gun; gun control laws only serve to restrict the liberties of the law abiding and do nothing to stop criminal from getting guns.

 

[gallantwarrior]

Firearms are not licensed (yet), although some classes of firearms dealers must acquire a license. To date, we still (fortunately) do not have an official firearms registry, although the requirement of dealers to indefinitely maintain the Form 4473 filled out at the time of purchase constitutes a de-facto registry.

Good point. I suppose I should have said "licensing to bear firearms", rather than "licensing for firearms", the latter suggesting that it is the firearm rather than the person to which the license pertains.

You don't need a license to own a firearm (yet). Many states require a license to carry a firearm on your person. The license indicates that you are aware of safe firearms handling and the implications of carrying a firearm, as well as its use, should that be necessary. A private citizen does not need a license to buy or own a firearm (yet).

 

[DiamondDave]

Its sufficient to show it will disproportionately affect minorities.

Wrong. Apparently you think we should repeal laws against armed robbery and murder as well. Those laws also disproportionately affect minorities.

No, I don't think that, nor is that apparent. For a law to be racist it must not only affect minorities disproportionately, it must serve no legitimate purpose. since, obviously, anyone willing to cast an illegal vote is also willing to make a fake photo id, the voter id law only serves to restrict the liberties of lawful voters and does nothing to stop unlawful votes.

Do you ever tire of getting ***** slapped in your arguments??

 

[Sallow]

Noting again your insanely stupid leap in logic, offered as a red herring...

All elections are state elections. No need for a national ID card.

Ah..so this ID thing is bullshit..ain't it?

Just as I thought.

Again - another insanely stupid leap in logic.
You have quite a knack for these.

Insane leap of logic?

The issue is an insane leap of logic. You guys are looking for a remedy for a problem that really doesn't exist. There have been a handful of arrests for voter fraud..and that's only if you aggregrate them all over a decade.

In my state, you register according to what district you live in...you show up to the polling station, sign your name..and vote. Simple. There's no need for any id after you register, because your name is mapped to your address.

In any case..since you guys are so nuts about this..and illegal immigrants..a national id, provided free of charge, makes a great deal of sense. Especially if it's biometric. It can be mapped to your SSID as well. And your passport. With a NID, polling stations are no longer necessary either. You can vote on your home computer or at the local 7/11. The tech is all available right down to impossible to crack encryption. And you can use it to track whether people are working illegally or not..rather easily too.

But that's not something you want..is it?

 

[IndependntLogic]

Do you support the requirement that people show a photo ID to buy a gun?
If so, how then can you oppose the same requirement in order to vote?

As an Independent, I'm just fine and dandy with voter ID laws.
And with strict gun control and registration laws. (Yes I own a gun, btw).

 

[M14 Shooter]

Ah..so this ID thing is bullshit..ain't it?

Just as I thought.

Again - another insanely stupid leap in logic.
You have quite a knack for these.

Insane leap of logic?

Yes. On its face.

The issue is an insane leap of logic.

Not that anyone here has been able to show.

You guys are looking for a remedy for a problem that really doesn't exist. There have been a handful of arrests for voter fraud..and that's only if you aggregrate them all over a decade.

Not sure how many times I can type "false premise"...
The compelling sate interest for verification of the prospective voter exists absent ANY actual cases of voter fraud.

In my state, you register according to what district you live in...you show up to the polling station, sign your name..and vote. Simple. There's no need for any id after you register, because your name is mapped to your address.

None of which in any way verifies that you are the person you say you are, or the person on the registration roll. None. Absent a proof of ID, nothing keeps someone else from voting under YOUR registration.

In any case since you guys are so nuts about this..and illegal immigrants..a national id, provided free of charge, makes a great deal of sense.

It doesnt matter how many times you exspress your insanely stupid leaps of logic - they are still insanely stupid and they are still leaps.