Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Identifying the voter needs to be done for absentee ballots however that becomes much more difficult than in person voting. The logical first step is to implement it for in person voting since it's so easy to do. From there you can consider how to do it for absentee ballots.
How will those that are homebound be identified? What about those in hospitals, nursing homes, etc.?
How will those that are homebound be identified? What about those in hospitals, nursing homes, etc.?
No doubt it becomes very difficult. Biometrics is about the only way I can see it being done. As I've mentioned PA already uses facial recognition for their ID's and that would be the easiest avenue to pursue since you already have a "fingerprint" on file with the state. Perhaps an exemption for the truly infirmed with a doctors note provided with the ballot.
The problem with your argument is that you fail to acknowledge that there are restrictions on the right to vote.
There is an age restriction
There is a residency restriction...........just to name two.
If there were no restrictions on who could vote, there would be no need for ID's.
However, there are restrictions.
Age restriction exists because of maturity/intelligence factors. Residency exists because you're not allowed to vote for another areas representative. Those are pretty logical reasons. ID requirements are just a way for some to stop others from casting their votes to a particular party under the weak premise of "massive" fraud claims.
Because the right to vote, is a RIGHT. The others are privileges. Buying a beer is not the same as casting a vote.
Keeping and bearing guns is also a right, guaranteed by the Second Amendment and recently affirmed in several Supreme Court cases. And yet, one must submit to background checks conducted by the police -- a far more onerous burden than simply showing an ID card -- before one can lawfully exercise this right.
Following the logic of your argument, one should simply be able to walk into a store and buy whatever and how many guns they like, no questions asked. If you indeed support this position, then you are being logically consistent and I will refrain from further comment on your posts. But otherwise, I would ask you to explain the difference.
How will those that are homebound be identified? What about those in hospitals, nursing homes, etc.?
I'd simply ask how they manage it in the jillion (well, half a jillion) countries in places like Europe that require some sort of ID. There's no point in reinventing the wheel.
Keeping and bearing guns is also a right, guaranteed by the Second Amendment and recently affirmed in several Supreme Court cases. And yet, one must submit to background checks conducted by the police -- a far more onerous burden than simply showing an ID card -- before one can lawfully exercise this right.
Following the logic of your argument, one should simply be able to walk into a store and buy whatever and how many guns they like, no questions asked. If you indeed support this position, then you are being logically consistent and I will refrain from further comment on your posts. But otherwise, I would ask you to explain the difference.
Society determined owning guns constituted the need to show ID and pass certain criteria. It wasn't always that way of course. We had no formal ID's for much of the early years of our country's existance. Society changed the rules. Of course we didn't have Striker 12 automatic shotguns in the 19th century either.
Most would argue that guns can kill, while casting a vote does not. That's the difference. Really the only one. Is it hypocritical. Sure. Inconsistant. Yes.
But if you're trying to make the argument that we have to show ID's for this reason or that one. Then why not for many other potential dangerous or fraudulent possibilities. You could be mailing anthrax in that letter. Or a bomb in that fedex package. Why not show a postman an ID before you drop that letter in a mailbox. You see where we're heading? Is that the society you want? It seems like a lot of people won't be satified until we resemble North Korea or the Third Reich. Laugh and scoff if you want. But we didn't always have to show ID to buy a gun or alcohol or tobacco. We do now. Just think what we'll have to do in future generations.
Maybe it's for the best. I have serious doubts to it. I don't want to have to show my "papers" or photo ID to do many daily activities I take for granted today. I don't want a microchip embedded under my skin or a bar code tattooed on myself. This may be OT. But we are going down a slippery slope.
Without the ID, it would be fairly easy to vote multiple times. Simply pick a name out of the recent obituaries, google the name to get address and other information, then go to the polls and say that you are William Smith of 12 Baker Lane... Unless it is a fairly small town, the odds of getting caught are negligible...
Society determined owning guns constituted the need to show ID and pass certain criteria. It wasn't always that way of course. We had no formal ID's for much of the early years of our country's existance. Society changed the rules. Of course we didn't have Striker 12 automatic shotguns in the 19th century either.
Most would argue that guns can kill, while casting a vote does not. That's the difference. Really the only one. Is it hypocritical. Sure. Inconsistant. Yes.
But if you're trying to make the argument that we have to show ID's for this reason or that one. Then why not for many other potential dangerous or fraudulent possibilities. You could be mailing anthrax in that letter. Or a bomb in that fedex package. Why not show a postman an ID before you drop that letter in a mailbox. You see where we're heading? Is that the society you want? It seems like a lot of people won't be satified until we resemble North Korea or the Third Reich. Laugh and scoff if you want. But we didn't always have to show ID to buy a gun or alcohol or tobacco. We do now. Just think what we'll have to do in future generations.
Maybe it's for the best. I have serious doubts to it. I don't want to have to show my "papers" or photo ID to do many daily activities I take for granted today. I don't want a microchip embedded under my skin or a bar code tattooed on myself. This may be OT. But we are going down a slippery slope.
Yes, society has changed. We now have millions of illegal immigrants in the country and more every day. Terrorist threats are now a real big concern too.
Billions are spent on campaigns, lives are affected by the results so why is there a problem with showing an ID so that citizens only vote?
Citizenship is a right only for those born in the USA or naturalized through birth to military parents or citizens overseas when the birth takes place.
For everyone else it is a privilege. As such, there is no invasion of privacy to show ID when going to a polling station.
Yes, society has changed and with those changes comes a need to insure the integrity of the vote.
When it comes to voter suppression, even more reason to show ID. Showing ID can be used as a tool to catch those who want to suppress citizens from voting.
If you don't show ID, then how can you claim your vote was suppressed?
Of course, if the idea is to allow non-citizens to vote because of the absence of the requirement to show ID, then the agenda fits.
There is "fraud" in all elections. No question. But out of the millions of votes cast, the percentage is so small is it worth the millions in costs? Is it worth disenfranchising the young, the poor, the elderly, the minorities of this country from voting? I don't think so.
I've googled some articles today and saw reports that in my state of Minnesota there have been 10 reported cases of alleged voter fraud since 2000 (through 2012) and zero cases of voter impersonation. That's out of millions of votes cast. Maybe some other states have worse figures. No election will ever be perfect, even one with ID's or computers and all sorts of gadgets, systems, checks and balances, etc.
It's just a feeble attempt to stop certain segments of our population from voting.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
