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.
Gays want to be able to target, threaten and harass people. Ballots should be kept secret to protect people from the deranged.
I agree. It isn't a gay/straight issue either. Unions also want to make votes public so they can threaten and harass those who do not want a union. People need to be free to cast their vote, or sign a petition, without intimidation or fear of retaliation.
Political campaigns use individual voter data for things that don't involve inciting violence.
Those exit polls are also anonymous. Which is why there is no violence or intimidation involved.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FinkieMcGee
Edit: Also the article is unclear, I could be missing something though. Are they asking for signatures on the petition to put this on the ballot (I'm not sure how Washington works, but that's how it works in CA) or are they asking for the the names of the people that voted on the measure?
Edit 2: Ah, I see, it's for the petition signatures, not where individuals voted on ballot initiatives. I can understand making this data public record to ensure all the petition signers are actual individuals that are alive/registered to vote.
I was confused by the article as well. It says "ballot measure", but refers to "signatures", and since ballot measures are voted on and not signed, I concluded that the author was referring to a petition and not a ballot measure.
Petitions are also not made public for the same reason individual votes are not made public. After the clerk or registrar validates the signatures on the petition the results are made public, but not the petition itself.
Those exit polls are also anonymous. Which is why there is no violence or intimidation involved.
Petitions are also not made public for the same reason votes are not made public. After the clerk or registrar validates the signatures on the petition the results are made public, but not the petition itself.
Voter data (such as voting for a Dem/Republican) isn't based on exit polling and it isn't anonymous. That data is public domain. My company deals with said data and I'm looking at it right now! Campaigns use walk lists with that data listed.
Which candidate you specifically vote for in a primary and general is private.
Also according to the article:
Quote:
"Washington has been releasing petitions for years, and there's no indication that anybody has been harassed or bothered," Collins, the state's lead lawyer on the case, says in an interview, noting that lower courts have never made any finding on whether the petition signers would truly be threatened if their identities were made public.
I dunno, I don't see an issue with releasing this information if there is a precedent. If there is violence due to this, the individuals causing the trouble should be charged and prosecuted, that should not prevent the information from being disclosed if it has been disclosed in the past.
I dunno, I don't see an issue with releasing this information if there is a precedent. If there is violence due to this, the individuals causing the trouble should be charged and prosecuted, that should not prevent the information from being disclosed if it has been disclosed in the past.
The real question is, how many refused to sign petitions knowing that they would be made public? That is something no one can accurately assess. Those who voice opinions publicly have been harassed, intimidated, and threatened with violence, including death threats. So it is disingenuous to say it has never happened.
The real question is, how many refused to sign petitions knowing that they would be made public? That is something no one can accurately assess. Those who voice opinions publicly have been harassed, intimidated, and threatened with violence, including death threats. So it is disingenuous to say it has never happened.
What proof do you have that people haven't signed petitions due to possible harassment? I've signed plenty of petitions and it's never crossed my mind.
You also need to keep in mind that if someone is harassed, police exist in order to handle that situation.
What you're saying is akin to "If someone drinks and drives, they might kill someone. So we should just ban drinking". We don't ban alcohol, we send people that break the law while under the influence of alcohol to jail.
Similarly if someone breaks the law with this information that has already been in the public domain, they should be tried accordingly.
Whether you believe the system works, is another matter.
I'd honestly prefer that data to be in the open to prevent fraud, if news outlets can't get their hands on the information there is a whole lot of room for corrupt officials to push petitions that don't have enough signatures onto a ballot. But I don't live in Washington, so I guess it's up to them
If you have a right to say whatever you like, you should be able to stand behind your convictions and be willing to say it publicly--and deal with whatever consequences or repercussions result.
Otherwise, it's a wise man who knows when to speak, and when to keep his mouth shut.
In the case of signing petitions, it is imperative that the information be public so that opposing interest can verify and challenge names that are not the real and true signatures of voters. I do not even think anybody signing such a thing would have any expectation of privacy.
In other places such as the internet, people have more expectation of privacy.
Location: Jonquil City (aka Smyrna) Georgia- by Atlanta
16,259 posts, read 24,766,887 times
Reputation: 3587
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glitch
Petitions are not secret, nor are they available to the public. The registrar or clerk's office validates the authenticity of the signators before determining whether there are enough signatures. The results of the registrar/clerk's validation is made public, but the petition is not.
Oh and we are just supposed to accept on faith that the petition is valid because some appointed political hack says so??? I don't think so.
Location: Jonquil City (aka Smyrna) Georgia- by Atlanta
16,259 posts, read 24,766,887 times
Reputation: 3587
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nomander
TK, Ive seen your posts enough to know you have a very "in your face, won't back down, I can take on the world" approach to things, but my reasoning for such has nothing to do with "fear" and is simply a practical fact of life.
Some people will do all that I mentioned for simply having an opinion, especially in issues such as politics. I would prefer to remain anonymous in those situations simply so I don't have to deal with random idiots coming to contest my opinion. Life has enough catches and obstacles to have to deal with insignificant trash that wishes to get confrontational because you disagree with them.
I don't fear them, I simply would rather not deal with them as it is a pointless process. You could be the toughest man in the world and able to beat down person after person who attacks you, but eventually it is simply going to be a waste of your time. I need not prove myself to anyone and I fear no person, except maybe my wife. *chuckle*
Believe me, the idiots will bug you too. I wrote an item in a magazine once and made the mistake of having a listed phone number. The phone did not quit ringing for 2 weeks!
What proof do you have that people haven't signed petitions due to possible harassment? I've signed plenty of petitions and it's never crossed my mind.
How about the fact that there are companies that exist solely to protect someone's identity? The very fact that these companies exist, and are profitable, should tell you that people do not want their personal information made public. Why would any sane individual volunteer their personal information if they knew it was going to be made public?
Quote:
Originally Posted by FinkieMcGee
You also need to keep in mind that if someone is harassed, police exist in order to handle that situation.
No, the police do no exist to "handle that situation", they exist to enforce the law. By the time the police act, the law has already been broken.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FinkieMcGee
What you're saying is akin to "If someone drinks and drives, they might kill someone. So we should just ban drinking". We don't ban alcohol, we send people that break the law while under the influence of alcohol to jail.
Similarly if someone breaks the law with this information that has already been in the public domain, they should be tried accordingly.
No, what I am saying is that no one has the right to make personal information public without the express consent of the individual in question, and the ONLY reason to make personal voter or petition information public is to incite violence against those you oppose.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FinkieMcGee
I'd honestly prefer that data to be in the open to prevent fraud, if news outlets can't get their hands on the information there is a whole lot of room for corrupt officials to push petitions that don't have enough signatures onto a ballot. But I don't live in Washington, so I guess it's up to them
If you want to be totally naive and open yourself up to criminal activity by making your personal information public, that is entirely up to you, but you do not have the right to make other people's personal information public. That would be a crime.
oppression of free speech is an evil and should be resisted.
silence is not the act of wisdom it is the result of oppression.
in the name of civil rights much oppression is exercised of free speech.
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.
Campaigns use walk lists with that data listed.
