Can someone explain why this is *gasp* RACIST

Since we have the right to bear arms and one of the obvious exceptions is that children can't buy them, then shouldn't we provide free IDs to people so they can go to gun shops to pick up their weapons without restriction when they turn 18 if they've got the cash and they meet the criminal background checks?

This would have the dual advantage of qualifying them to vote as well. Heck, we could set up polling places at pawn shops.

No taf, I am saying that screaming that the required photo ID is already within their possession so why are they complaining and acting like they have to go out and get a totally different photo ID to vote.

If they don't have one - and I find that very hard to believe - then and only then would there be a problem.

The law isn't demanding that folks get a special photo ID. It telling them to use the one they have.

And I am asking why is that suddenly a poll tax, a racist tactic, a way to stop the poor from voting.

If you wanna nitpick, it'd be ageist profiling- justified because access to smokes and booze is restricted by age. Neither purchase is a constitutional right. Nor is access limited by citizenship.

Honestly, I didn't get my first DL until I was in my mid 20s. In my part of the city, it'd be fair to say over half of the adults here don't have at least a current one either.

All that said, the US has elections every leap year, it shouldn't be so hard to get your shit together to meet the alternate ID qualifications.

I would venture to say that probably most people who don't haven't gone to the trouble of getting a photo ID don't give a shit about voting.

Or the goings on in civilization in general.

If you want to find someone who is denied the ability to buy a firearm for lack of ID and take it to court that there is a constitutional requirement to provide free IDs that would allow people to obtain firearms, knock yourself out.

Something similar happened to establish the need for access to free IDs in the voting context.

Not everyone has the required photo ID. In addition to those who might never get one or want one, there are those people who have lost theirs, had theirs destroyed and not been able to get replacements in time to vote.

It is a poll tax if you essentially require someone to have paid money to vote. The law says if you have to have paid money at some point to get an ID to vote, that can be considered a poll tax.

The easy way around that is for the government to create a valid ID that is available for free. That anyone would hesitate over the small hit to the state raises questions about whether this is really about preventing voter fraud or something else.

Again, on its face, there is nothing discriminatory about a poll tax. However, it was used so blatantly discriminatorily that it eventually became unconstitutional.

It may be overly cautious to worry that requiring ID might be used in a discriminatory fashion. But I'd personally rather have courts err on the side of caution here than to allow a requirement that does end up disenfranchise legitimate voters.

Multiple pages behind now, and I'm not wading through everyones to catch up, so I'll just ask:

Has anyone explained yet why the gas you burn in your car while driving to the voting facility doesn't qualify as a poll tax?

Don't bother answering if all you've got is "That is where popularity demands the arbitrary line be drawn."

It can't be racist. Racism doesn't exist. Except against white people. But racism against other people doesn't exist. It's all just jokes. People need to have a sense of humor.

Right?

I know sarcasm isn't lost on you. I just can't believe you didn't see how you just turned the virtue of defending a right into defending something that benefits your political viewpoint.

Apparently you think rights are only important if it's something that's important to your point of view. You could just as easily have said gun ownership is a constitutionally protected amendment and that if we're going to give away identification to "guarantee" rights then we should do it for all rights.

But you didn't...

Sorry, but that argument is essentially a degrees of separation argument, and frankly it doesn't make much sense. An actual poll tax is money that is charged at the polling stations, which is what was historically done to prevent minorities from voting until it was banned. A photo ID is something everyone should have in their daily lives anyway, and contrary to popular belief, they don't cost that much. I had one when I was a teenager prior to getting a driver's permit, because my parents felt I should have a form of photo ID. It cost them all of $8 and all that was needed was my birth certificate, which they already had, and my social security number, which they already had. Paying money for a photo ID and poll taxes are two separate things, and anyone with an ounce of intellectual honesty knows this. The issue at hand is making sure everyone who votes is actually eligible to do so. This is why certain parties have made this a racial issue, and again, everyone with an ounce of intellectual honesty knows that this is the case.

Re: How many "racist" threads can Rightyforge start?

Because I'm amazed that someone pushing 60 whose kids have kids is still being carded? Whatever you say, Papaw. It's clear you don't see why this is being done, but that's what happens when your "libertarianism" is fenced around with qualifiers.

Nothing demands you to drive to the polling place. Take the bus, grab a ride with a friend, have a volunteer drive you.

Or just walk. I walk to my polling place. It's always staffed by the nicest Vietnamese ladies.

I actually did. I said in a few posts above the following:

At the end of the day, it is what it is.

Courts have held that requiring voters to show ID to vote without allowing access to a free ID is akin to a poll tax. Period.

That may be wrongly decided, but it's the way it is.

It may be overly cautious on their part, but given the importance of the right to vote, again, I feel like that cautiousness (and setting up a system where people could get free voting-only IDs) is a small price to pay.

Bus costs money.

Friends car costs money.

My shoes cost money.

How many "racist" threads can Rightyforge start?

Another Righty demanding "free stuff."

For starters, the costs associated with getting to the polling place can't be considered a "tax," since the government is not requiring you to get the gas from it (or to use public transportation, or use it in any way whatsoever).

By contrast, the only acceptable form of ID would be a state-sponsored one.

Again, if someone wanted to litigate that the government should pay for transportation to the polls or else it is infringing on someone's rights, they are free to do so.

I personally think such a suit would be laughed out of court.

Only in America could a debate about having to show ID to vote get this stupid.

I think you need another civil war to sort things out.

How many "racist" threads can Rightyforge start?

What's amusing here is that the technology exists to use thumb prints, retina scans, and even ear prints (apparently ears are as individual as fingerprints) as ID, so clinging to this notion of a laminated cardboard ID is pretty antiquated.

But just watch the TightyRighties have hysterics if Gubmint decided to implement any of those forms of identification across the board. Then, and only thing, would it become an Invasion of Privacy and a Violation of Unalienable Rights.

That would be fun to watch. And, given the number of multiple births as a result of fertility treatments, one might also anticipate lawsuits from twins and triplets whose siblings passed themselves off as each other using identical thumbprints. Fun times.

Alabama is closer to Mexico than California? Who would have guessed?

Re: How many "racist" threads can Rightyforge start?

No twins have the same fingerprints/ear prints. They are similar but always different as both are not only shaped by genetics but shaped by other factors.

Retina scans are the same. No two people including identical twins have the same layout of blood vessels in their retinas.

Incidentally if we could get Retina scans to be cheap and easy to use this would eliminate the need for a voter ID.

It's rather interesting that in one sentence you say leave it alone and literally the next sentence you say change it. Make up your mind already.

Meh. Standard Tea Party shtick. Repeal all the laws they don't like or understand. Gunz good. Gubmint bad.

Re: How many "racist" threads can Rightyforge start?

Yep, it's the law. And businesses can get hit with big fines for not doing it.

I can explain it. You have to have one option which is free but every option doesn't have to be free. So I can go to the polling station and vote for free or I can pay a small charge to get an absentee ballot but since one of those options are free it still passes constitutional muster. Now, yes, the guy could drive or take the bus and pay a small fee for that or, if he really wanted to, he could also walk the 1 mile to the polling station and skip those expenses. He's opting to pay the bus company because he likes the convenience but he technically could still walk for free if he wanted to.

So that wouldn't violate the constitutional requirement. With the voter ID laws you literally must have an ID which means you must pay for an ID, there is no way around it in many states. If they made the ID free (including all the paperwork needed to get the ID) then that objection would be dropped and everyone would agree it's free so it would pass constitutional muster.

Re: How many "racist" threads can Rightyforge start?

Obviously it's the law in Texas and Tennessee. But as I said upthread, not in the states I've lived in. Perhaps you can provide evidence to the contrary? Probably not.

Nothing demands that you be such a complete failure at life that you can't keep track of a photo ID and birth certificate, either. Holding you responsible for ID is no different from holding you responsible for transportation. To claim otherwise is to impose an arbitrary distinction.

Next?

How many "racist" threads can Rightyforge start?

And this is why, if you're going to participate in a thread, it helps to actually know what it's about...

As stated above, one difference is in part governmental involvement.

The government is not requiring people to use the bus, their car, or whatever other means to get to the polling place.

The government is forcing people to provide only ID that they provide.

If a state passed a law saying, "To be eligible to vote, you must show that you used public transportation to get to the polling place," that would likely be struck down as unconstitutional as well.

Re: How many "racist" threads can Rightyforge start?

Fines and/or loss of licenses for business that sell alcohol to minors are present in almost all states. what states have you lived in?

I suggest you read the 24th amendment & a summary of case history about it and get back to us. The constitution says voting has to be free and not cost anyone anything ever. It doesn't say you have to have anything else free but it does REQUIRE that voting be free. The Supreme Court has also already struck down ID laws saying they require someone to pay for an ID if they want to vote so according to the SCotUS if the ID isn't free it can't be a requirement to vote.