• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Pennyslvania Did the Right Thing Regarding Voter ID Law

HAHA...online voting. That seems secure. Might as well ask Anonymous and lulzsec to just pick the President.
 
Not any more or less secure than someone to walk into a polling station and not have to show ID that they are who they say they are.
 
i often forget what an idiot 2&2 is, but then i remind myself that he idolizes a guy who kills people drinking and driving and continues to do it. not to undermine just how awful 2&2's namesake is, but his act of relentlessly stupid posts reminds me of leyritz's relentlessly stupid decision making.
 
Strickland33 said:
QFT. I wish that 2&2 and jhmd would engage with the bold.
Click to expand...

I love these self-serving, false choices.

You either agree with me, or you rape invalid llamas. Which is it, HMMMMMMMMMMM?

No, we have no interest in taking very reasonable, common sense and prevalent in nearly every other segment of adult life steps like verifying identity and eligibility to safeguard the electoral process. It's not like voting is as important as getting beer, driving a car or riding in an airplane. Of course, if you don't agree with me 100%, you probably rape llamas.
 
Self-serving false choices like "we have to change laws around the country in the next few weeks or the entire election will be a fraud"?
 
PhDeac said:
Self-serving false choices like "we have to change laws around the country in the next few weeks or the entire election will be a fraud"?
Click to expand...

Let's see who is, and who is not, speaking in absolutes on this thread.
 
Let's see who is speaking in absolutes on this issue.
 
2&2 Slider To Leyritz said:
I do not care how rural or impoverished they are. Unless they are physically handicapped, I fail to see how they are unable to procure a free ID card with 5 weeks' notice. Are they immobile shut-ins? If not, they manage to function in their lives to at least some minimal degree. How is going to pick up a free ID card not the most minimal of requirements?
Click to expand...

Some PA state ID offices only open twice a month, during business hours, for limited hours. The court found significant hardships in obtaining the IDs, which is why it ruled the way it did.
 
PhDeac said:
Let's see who is speaking in absolutes on this issue.
Click to expand...

It's insane to say that the issue of voter i.d. is a litmus test for reasonableness (what you said). It's dishonest to say that I (or anyone, to my review) has said "If we don't have voter i.d.s, the entire election is a fraud, without regard to the margin of victory". (what nobody said).

First, to what you said: Do you see no room for reasonable disagreement about voter identification? This issue is so perfectly clear to you--that there is absolutely no potential for fraud, since the penalties are too high (RJ actually said this. In public.)---and anyone who disagrees with that immaculate opinion is manifestly unreasonable? Absolute, absolute, absolute.

Second, to what I didn't say: I didn't say what you pretend I said. Nobody would say "Either we have i.d.s, or the entire election is fraudulent, without regard to the margin of victory." What I believe is that it helps bolster confidence in the integrity of the electoral process when we treat self-governance in accordance with its status as a sacred rite. If candidate A wins in a Reagan-esque landslide, no one would doubt the legitimacy of the outcome. But do YOU purport to say that a party never casts doubt on the integrity of the result of a close election? If so, did you miss the last decade? YOUR party did that. Why not be smart when you have the chance?
 
ArlingtonDeac said:
Some PA state ID offices only open twice a month, during business hours, for limited hours. The court found significant hardships in obtaining the IDs, which is why it ruled the way it did.
Click to expand...

I have a Constitutional right to own a firearm. To do so, North Carolina requires that I first obtain a purchase permit. To obtain said purchase permit, I have to drive to the permitting desk at the main County police station to both pick up and drop off the paper application (not available online and they will not mail it to me). Said permitting desk is only open during limited hours during business hours, and is over a 30-minute drive from where I work in another county. Apparently, I need to sue the state to forego the application process, as there is a significant hardship in obtaining the paperwork. Then everyone will be able to get their guns without having to prove who they say they are. Sweet.
 
2&2 Slider To Leyritz said:
I did. I have no interest in voter suppression, I would be in favor of online voting. What pisses me off is the attitude that it is somehow morally offensive to require that any person take one single ounce of personal responsibility to accomplish anything government-related.
Click to expand...

Actually, it's morally repugnant to draft a law restricting a guaranteed constitutional right without any proven necessity of such a law, regardless of whether complying is difficult or not. When dealing with a fundamental constitutional right, the burden is on the proposed legislation to prove that it has a point, not on the people to establish that the rule isn't too much trouble. Voter ID laws fail this test emphatically.

I assume you equally support second amendment restrictions that might be proposed and passed, regardless of whether they are proven to be necessary, or if they only create a small burden on gun owners?
 
2&2 Slider To Leyritz said:
Not any more or less secure than someone to walk into a polling station and not have to show ID that they are who they say they are.
Click to expand...

Um, yeah, it's a lot more secure to require individual, in-person voting. Trying organizing 10,000 fake voters some time. Or even 1000. Or even 10. You won't succeed. But online voting is pretty much the best possible answer to rigging an election through fraudulent votes. That's likely the only way to do it without having inside control of the process itself.
 
Last edited:
2&2 Slider To Leyritz said:
I have a Constitutional right to own a firearm. To do so, North Carolina requires that I first obtain a purchase permit. To obtain said purchase permit, I have to drive to the permitting desk at the main County police station to both pick up and drop off the paper application (not available online and they will not mail it to me). Said permitting desk is only open during limited hours during business hours, and is over a 30-minute drive from where I work in another county. Apparently, I need to sue the state to forego the application process, as there is a significant hardship in obtaining the paperwork. Then everyone will be able to get their guns without having to prove who they say they are. Sweet.
Click to expand...

An illegally cast vote can be removed, and the person can be punished. While a person can be punished for illegally possessing a gun, the dead guy cannot be brought back to life.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top