Partisan bull****. And not even close to the same.
Requiring an ID is a way to suppress the young and minority vote, who tend to overwhelmingly vote democrat.
Requiring an ID to buy a gun is meant to make sure that criminals aren't purchasing them.
How are those even remotely the same...?
Holder, easily the worst attorney general in my generation. He makes his decisions based on social justice, not law. He's a complete ****ing moron.
You refer to verified voter fraud being low, I agree. However, what assurance do you have that any of the votes were legitimate if no one had to prove their identity and eligibility to vote? I have no desire to suppress anyone our their vote but I have every right to demand that those voting have the right to vote and that the ballot that they are casting is their own.
Voter suppression is a BS argument because you can't function in our society without ID and the people that supposedly can't get an ID sure manage to get government assistance, cigarettes, and liquor just fine.
Just exactly how difficult is it to get an ID?
If you've got time to register to vote, you've got time to get an ID. Seriously, who the hell functions in today's society without one? How do you open a bank account, cash a check, or buy beer?
It's simply a good idea to have ID in the first place.
---------- Post added at 06:58 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:56 PM ----------
Buddy beat me to it by a minute.
1) Win the next game.
2) See #1
"The problem with internet quotes lies in verifying their authenticity."
Welcome Home Lord Stanley!
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Now if we went to something like a national ID that were free, that's something else entirely. But, if that was available, I doubt we'd be seeing these laws come up at all...
I like you man, but this kool-aid stuff you and others talk about is disrespectful. There is no kool aid. My undergrad degree had a minor in sociology. If I was willing to stay one more semester I would have had a second bachelor's in sociology. I've studied this stuff extensively. To come here and tell me I don't know what I'm talking about, and that I'm only parroting back what I've heard, is insulting. Especially since I don't listen to any talking heads and I don't watch TV.
There are scientific studies behind this. I'm not going to go into it, because really, who cares that much? But the data is there.
And if voter fraud is low (but really practically non-existent), which you admit, why do this at all? Why tackle a problem that isn't there? I think you know the answer to that, but don't want to face the reality on this one...