(08-11-2017 12:49 PM)94computerguy Wrote:  

(09-30-2016 01:03 PM)ShadyP Wrote:  Just checked the DMV site. Getting an ID costs $10. I repeat $10. Forget about voting everyone should have some form of picture ID anyway. Seems like to me it would be pretty dang hard to function in our society without a picture ID.

Ok, so let's suppose you're 80, poor, black, and born in rural Charlotte County and moved to Elkton at some point. So in addition to the $10 (which is a bit of a stretch on social security), you need your birth certificate. Lost in a fire in 1950? Too bad, that's 2 trips to the Charlotte County Courthouse to try to provide documentation and then a trip to the DMV. Don't have a car? Well, a 2-hour bus trip and/or a ride. Gotta get a ride back too, and does the bus run that late on the way home? Probably, but who knows. So now your $10 trip to the DMV is a multi-day affair. Sure, you say, that's an 80-year-old retiree - what's a few days to them. But surely you see my point - that's not "nation of victims", that's "placing an undue burden to vote on someone was born here and deserves to vote just as much as you do."

And you can't deny the demographics here. The people for whom a $10 ID is NBD are those with cars, drivers licenses, and jobs. The people for whom that's several days of effort and $10 is not "nothing" are, demographically, more likely to vote for Democrats. Add to that the notion that Republican politicians are *overwhelmingly* more likely to say voter fraud is a big deal (when in fact most voter-fraud convictions are for people voting Republican) and your conclusion has to be that the intent is to disenfranchise likely Democratic voters.

Dude, I lost my birth certificate in a move and had to get one to renew my passport a few years ago. I had to send a notarized form in to Santa Clara County California with some personal information and a $15 processing fee. No bus trips. No fuss. No muss. This mythology that acquring a state-issued ID is some sort of hurculean task is a bunch of BS perpetuated by folks who think their side benefits politically having ineligible and dead people vote. It's that simple.

And seriously, did you have to say "black" in describing your hapless and helpless person above? Pretty telling as to your worldview if you ask me. You let your holier-than-thou mask slip there for a second, chief.

I don't know 94computerguy but I assume he said "black" because studies have shown that minorities tend to be adversely impacted by voter ID laws much more so than whites.

Things that do require showing a picture ID: buying alcohol, buying cigarettes, opening a bank account, applying for food stamps, applying for welfare, applying for Medicare/Medicaid, applying for unemployment, renting an apartment or house, buying a house, applying for a mortgage, driving a car, renting a car, buying a car, get on an airplane, get married, purchase a gun, rent a hotel room, apply for a hunting license, apply for a fishing license, donate blood, buy an 'adult' video game, purchase certain types of over-the-counter medications. Here in Colorado I had to show a picture ID when I adopted our dog from the county shelter.

Things that do not require showing a picture ID, if Democrats had their way: voting.

Get back to me when these requirements go away and people don't have to have IDs for them. Only then is having to get a picture ID really going to be a "burden".

(08-11-2017 04:58 PM)QuinDuke Wrote:  Things that do require showing a picture ID: buying alcohol, buying cigarettes, opening a bank account, applying for food stamps, applying for welfare, applying for Medicare/Medicaid, applying for unemployment, renting an apartment or house, buying a house, applying for a mortgage, driving a car, renting a car, buying a car, get on an airplane, get married, purchase a gun, rent a hotel room, apply for a hunting license, apply for a fishing license, donate blood, buy an 'adult' video game, purchase certain types of over-the-counter medications. Here in Colorado I had to show a picture ID when I adopted our dog from the county shelter.

Things that do not require showing a picture ID, if Democrats had their way: voting.

Get back to me when these requirements go away and people don't have to have IDs for them. Only then is having to get a picture ID really going to be a "burden".

Preach!

Sent from my SM-G900V using CSNbbs mobile app

(08-11-2017 06:45 PM)olderduke Wrote:  

(08-11-2017 04:58 PM)QuinDuke Wrote:  Things that do require showing a picture ID: buying alcohol, buying cigarettes, opening a bank account, applying for food stamps, applying for welfare, applying for Medicare/Medicaid, applying for unemployment, renting an apartment or house, buying a house, applying for a mortgage, driving a car, renting a car, buying a car, get on an airplane, get married, purchase a gun, rent a hotel room, apply for a hunting license, apply for a fishing license, donate blood, buy an 'adult' video game, purchase certain types of over-the-counter medications. Here in Colorado I had to show a picture ID when I adopted our dog from the county shelter.

Things that do not require showing a picture ID, if Democrats had their way: voting.

Get back to me when these requirements go away and people don't have to have IDs for them. Only then is having to get a picture ID really going to be a "burden".

Preach!

Sent from my SM-G900V using CSNbbs mobile app

That seems to have summed it up using some very simple language. I really don't know how anyone in the US can function without some official pictured form of identification. With that said, in Charlotte, no ID is required to vote. I could easily go vote during the early voting period and give my neighbor's name and address. Then on election day go and vote as the person who I am. Essentially casting a vote twice. My neighbor would show up to vote and not be able to and there is nothing showing that it was me who voted in his place during the early voting period. This is stupid.

(08-11-2017 08:10 PM)BleedingPurple Wrote:  

(08-11-2017 06:45 PM)olderduke Wrote:  

(08-11-2017 04:58 PM)QuinDuke Wrote:  Things that do require showing a picture ID: buying alcohol, buying cigarettes, opening a bank account, applying for food stamps, applying for welfare, applying for Medicare/Medicaid, applying for unemployment, renting an apartment or house, buying a house, applying for a mortgage, driving a car, renting a car, buying a car, get on an airplane, get married, purchase a gun, rent a hotel room, apply for a hunting license, apply for a fishing license, donate blood, buy an 'adult' video game, purchase certain types of over-the-counter medications. Here in Colorado I had to show a picture ID when I adopted our dog from the county shelter.

Things that do not require showing a picture ID, if Democrats had their way: voting.

Get back to me when these requirements go away and people don't have to have IDs for them. Only then is having to get a picture ID really going to be a "burden".

Preach!

Sent from my SM-G900V using CSNbbs mobile app

That seems to have summed it up using some very simple language. I really don't know how anyone in the US can function without some official pictured form of identification. With that said, in Charlotte, no ID is required to vote. I could easily go vote during the early voting period and give my neighbor's name and address. Then on election day go and vote as the person who I am. Essentially casting a vote twice. My neighbor would show up to vote and not be able to and there is nothing showing that it was me who voted in his place during the early voting period. This is stupid.

Many states have enacted some form of valid voter ID law. NC's was tossed because of its blatantly discriminatory impact.

(08-11-2017 09:10 PM)POTUS#4 Wrote:  

(08-11-2017 08:10 PM)BleedingPurple Wrote:  

(08-11-2017 06:45 PM)olderduke Wrote:  

(08-11-2017 04:58 PM)QuinDuke Wrote:  Things that do require showing a picture ID: buying alcohol, buying cigarettes, opening a bank account, applying for food stamps, applying for welfare, applying for Medicare/Medicaid, applying for unemployment, renting an apartment or house, buying a house, applying for a mortgage, driving a car, renting a car, buying a car, get on an airplane, get married, purchase a gun, rent a hotel room, apply for a hunting license, apply for a fishing license, donate blood, buy an 'adult' video game, purchase certain types of over-the-counter medications. Here in Colorado I had to show a picture ID when I adopted our dog from the county shelter.

Things that do not require showing a picture ID, if Democrats had their way: voting.

Get back to me when these requirements go away and people don't have to have IDs for them. Only then is having to get a picture ID really going to be a "burden".

Preach!

Sent from my SM-G900V using CSNbbs mobile app

That seems to have summed it up using some very simple language. I really don't know how anyone in the US can function without some official pictured form of identification. With that said, in Charlotte, no ID is required to vote. I could easily go vote during the early voting period and give my neighbor's name and address. Then on election day go and vote as the person who I am. Essentially casting a vote twice. My neighbor would show up to vote and not be able to and there is nothing showing that it was me who voted in his place during the early voting period. This is stupid.

Many states have enacted some form of valid voter ID law. NC's was tossed because of its blatantly discriminatory impact.

How was it blatantly discriminatory?

Sent from my SM-G900V using CSNbbs mobile app

(08-11-2017 09:31 PM)olderduke Wrote:  

(08-11-2017 09:10 PM)POTUS#4 Wrote:  

(08-11-2017 08:10 PM)BleedingPurple Wrote:  

(08-11-2017 06:45 PM)olderduke Wrote:  

(08-11-2017 04:58 PM)QuinDuke Wrote:  Things that do require showing a picture ID: buying alcohol, buying cigarettes, opening a bank account, applying for food stamps, applying for welfare, applying for Medicare/Medicaid, applying for unemployment, renting an apartment or house, buying a house, applying for a mortgage, driving a car, renting a car, buying a car, get on an airplane, get married, purchase a gun, rent a hotel room, apply for a hunting license, apply for a fishing license, donate blood, buy an 'adult' video game, purchase certain types of over-the-counter medications. Here in Colorado I had to show a picture ID when I adopted our dog from the county shelter.

Things that do not require showing a picture ID, if Democrats had their way: voting.

Get back to me when these requirements go away and people don't have to have IDs for them. Only then is having to get a picture ID really going to be a "burden".

Preach!

Sent from my SM-G900V using CSNbbs mobile app

That seems to have summed it up using some very simple language. I really don't know how anyone in the US can function without some official pictured form of identification. With that said, in Charlotte, no ID is required to vote. I could easily go vote during the early voting period and give my neighbor's name and address. Then on election day go and vote as the person who I am. Essentially casting a vote twice. My neighbor would show up to vote and not be able to and there is nothing showing that it was me who voted in his place during the early voting period. This is stupid.

Many states have enacted some form of valid voter ID law. NC's was tossed because of its blatantly discriminatory impact.

How was it blatantly discriminatory?

Sent from my SM-G900V using CSNbbs mobile app

NPR: http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2...ter-id-law

NY Times: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/15/us/po...olina.html

NC legislators didn't even try to hide how discriminatory this law was. There's something to be said for making sure that only those who are allowed to vote are actually voting, but these types of draconian laws are not the solution. These laws are such a drastic overreaction to a problem that is simply not occurring with the frequency that people think. As the NY Times article states, there have been 31 known cases of voter impersonation between 2000 and 2014. If this is happening so frequently, why aren't people getting caught left and right!? If 5 million people voted illegally in November, why haven't we had mass arrests of these folks!?

Do people vote illegally? Absolutely. Do people impersonate others and vote for them? I'm sure it happens. Does it happen with enough frequency to justify passing legislation with far-reaching implications that just so happen to disproportionately negatively affect certain groups of people? Absolutely not.

(08-11-2017 10:03 PM)jmu14 Wrote:  

(08-11-2017 09:31 PM)olderduke Wrote:  

(08-11-2017 09:10 PM)POTUS#4 Wrote:  

(08-11-2017 08:10 PM)BleedingPurple Wrote:  

(08-11-2017 06:45 PM)olderduke Wrote:  Preach!

Sent from my SM-G900V using CSNbbs mobile app

That seems to have summed it up using some very simple language. I really don't know how anyone in the US can function without some official pictured form of identification. With that said, in Charlotte, no ID is required to vote. I could easily go vote during the early voting period and give my neighbor's name and address. Then on election day go and vote as the person who I am. Essentially casting a vote twice. My neighbor would show up to vote and not be able to and there is nothing showing that it was me who voted in his place during the early voting period. This is stupid.

Many states have enacted some form of valid voter ID law. NC's was tossed because of its blatantly discriminatory impact.

How was it blatantly discriminatory?

Sent from my SM-G900V using CSNbbs mobile app

NPR: http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2...ter-id-law

NY Times: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/15/us/po...olina.html

NC legislators didn't even try to hide how discriminatory this law was. There's something to be said for making sure that only those who are allowed to vote are actually voting, but these types of draconian laws are not the solution. These laws are such a drastic overreaction to a problem that is simply not occurring with the frequency that people think. As the NY Times article states, there have been 31 known cases of voter impersonation between 2000 and 2014. If this is happening so frequently, why aren't people getting caught left and right!? If 5 million people voted illegally in November, why haven't we had mass arrests of these folks!?

Do people vote illegally? Absolutely. Do people impersonate others and vote for them? I'm sure it happens. Does it happen with enough frequency to justify passing legislation with far-reaching implications that just so happen to disproportionately negatively affect certain groups of people? Absolutely not.

All this has been hashed out in the previous 3 pages of this thread.

What's crazy is that a college student is going to jail for committing a crime which according to many of his fellow democrats A) does not happen and B) if it does, can't happen enough to effect an election.

What on earth would make him think it was worth doing????

Also, I'm not yet collecting social security but when I do, will it require me to have ID to cash and/or deposit the check? And if it does, isn't it worth the $10 fee to be able to do so?

(08-11-2017 12:49 PM)94computerguy Wrote:  

(09-30-2016 01:03 PM)ShadyP Wrote:  Just checked the DMV site. Getting an ID costs $10. I repeat $10. Forget about voting everyone should have some form of picture ID anyway. Seems like to me it would be pretty dang hard to function in our society without a picture ID.

Ok, so let's suppose you're 80, poor, black, and born in rural Charlotte County and moved to Elkton at some point. So in addition to the $10 (which is a bit of a stretch on social security), you need your birth certificate. Lost in a fire in 1950? Too bad, that's 2 trips to the Charlotte County Courthouse to try to provide documentation and then a trip to the DMV. Don't have a car? Well, a 2-hour bus trip and/or a ride. Gotta get a ride back too, and does the bus run that late on the way home? Probably, but who knows. So now your $10 trip to the DMV is a multi-day affair. Sure, you say, that's an 80-year-old retiree - what's a few days to them. But surely you see my point - that's not "nation of victims", that's "placing an undue burden to vote on someone was born here and deserves to vote just as much as you do."

And you can't deny the demographics here. The people for whom a $10 ID is NBD are those with cars, drivers licenses, and jobs. The people for whom that's several days of effort and $10 is not "nothing" are, demographically, more likely to vote for Democrats. Add to that the notion that Republican politicians are *overwhelmingly* more likely to say voter fraud is a big deal (when in fact most voter-fraud convictions are for people voting Republican) and your conclusion has to be that the intent is to disenfranchise likely Democratic voters.

Why did you have to bring race into it? You couldn't make your point without the person in your example being black? Stereotype much?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

(08-11-2017 03:47 PM)bridgeforthduke Wrote:  I don't know 94computerguy but I assume he said "black" because studies have shown that minorities tend to be adversely impacted by voter ID laws much more so than whites.

Yet a majority of AfricanAmericans support voter id laws.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

(08-11-2017 10:13 PM)JMUETC Wrote:  

(08-11-2017 10:03 PM)jmu14 Wrote:  

(08-11-2017 09:31 PM)olderduke Wrote:  

(08-11-2017 09:10 PM)POTUS#4 Wrote:  

(08-11-2017 08:10 PM)BleedingPurple Wrote:  That seems to have summed it up using some very simple language. I really don't know how anyone in the US can function without some official pictured form of identification. With that said, in Charlotte, no ID is required to vote. I could easily go vote during the early voting period and give my neighbor's name and address. Then on election day go and vote as the person who I am. Essentially casting a vote twice. My neighbor would show up to vote and not be able to and there is nothing showing that it was me who voted in his place during the early voting period. This is stupid.

Many states have enacted some form of valid voter ID law. NC's was tossed because of its blatantly discriminatory impact.

How was it blatantly discriminatory?

Sent from my SM-G900V using CSNbbs mobile app

NPR: http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2...ter-id-law

NY Times: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/15/us/po...olina.html

NC legislators didn't even try to hide how discriminatory this law was. There's something to be said for making sure that only those who are allowed to vote are actually voting, but these types of draconian laws are not the solution. These laws are such a drastic overreaction to a problem that is simply not occurring with the frequency that people think. As the NY Times article states, there have been 31 known cases of voter impersonation between 2000 and 2014. If this is happening so frequently, why aren't people getting caught left and right!? If 5 million people voted illegally in November, why haven't we had mass arrests of these folks!?

Do people vote illegally? Absolutely. Do people impersonate others and vote for them? I'm sure it happens. Does it happen with enough frequency to justify passing legislation with far-reaching implications that just so happen to disproportionately negatively affect certain groups of people? Absolutely not.

All this has been hashed out in the previous 3 pages of this thread.

What's crazy is that a college student is going to jail for committing a crime which according to many of his fellow democrats A) does not happen and B) if it does, can't happen enough to effect an election.

What on earth would make him think it was worth doing????

Also, I'm not yet collecting social security but when I do, will it require me to have ID to cash and/or deposit the check? And if it does, isn't it worth the $10 fee to be able to do so?

Haha, you cite 2 of the most liberal outlets in the history of the world. NPR = National Progressive Radio.

Sent from my SM-G900V using CSNbbs mobile app

(08-11-2017 10:23 PM)olderduke Wrote:  

(08-11-2017 10:13 PM)JMUETC Wrote:  

(08-11-2017 10:03 PM)jmu14 Wrote:  

(08-11-2017 09:31 PM)olderduke Wrote:  

(08-11-2017 09:10 PM)POTUS#4 Wrote:  Many states have enacted some form of valid voter ID law. NC's was tossed because of its blatantly discriminatory impact.

How was it blatantly discriminatory?

Sent from my SM-G900V using CSNbbs mobile app

NPR: http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2...ter-id-law

NY Times: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/15/us/po...olina.html

NC legislators didn't even try to hide how discriminatory this law was. There's something to be said for making sure that only those who are allowed to vote are actually voting, but these types of draconian laws are not the solution. These laws are such a drastic overreaction to a problem that is simply not occurring with the frequency that people think. As the NY Times article states, there have been 31 known cases of voter impersonation between 2000 and 2014. If this is happening so frequently, why aren't people getting caught left and right!? If 5 million people voted illegally in November, why haven't we had mass arrests of these folks!?

Do people vote illegally? Absolutely. Do people impersonate others and vote for them? I'm sure it happens. Does it happen with enough frequency to justify passing legislation with far-reaching implications that just so happen to disproportionately negatively affect certain groups of people? Absolutely not.

All this has been hashed out in the previous 3 pages of this thread.

What's crazy is that a college student is going to jail for committing a crime which according to many of his fellow democrats A) does not happen and B) if it does, can't happen enough to effect an election.

What on earth would make him think it was worth doing????

Also, I'm not yet collecting social security but when I do, will it require me to have ID to cash and/or deposit the check? And if it does, isn't it worth the $10 fee to be able to do so?

Haha, you cite 2 of the most liberal outlets in the history of the world. NPR = National Progressive Radio.

Sent from my SM-G900V using CSNbbs mobile app

Headline would have better read "Democrats win in attempt to further corral African American vote". As long as the Jesse's, Al's and Maxine's of the world own their minds, their place in life will be certain.

Sent from my SM-G900V using CSNbbs mobile app

(08-11-2017 10:23 PM)olderduke Wrote:  

(08-11-2017 10:13 PM)JMUETC Wrote:  

(08-11-2017 10:03 PM)jmu14 Wrote:  

(08-11-2017 09:31 PM)olderduke Wrote:  

(08-11-2017 09:10 PM)POTUS#4 Wrote:  Many states have enacted some form of valid voter ID law. NC's was tossed because of its blatantly discriminatory impact.

How was it blatantly discriminatory?

Sent from my SM-G900V using CSNbbs mobile app

NPR: http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2...ter-id-law

NY Times: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/15/us/po...olina.html

NC legislators didn't even try to hide how discriminatory this law was. There's something to be said for making sure that only those who are allowed to vote are actually voting, but these types of draconian laws are not the solution. These laws are such a drastic overreaction to a problem that is simply not occurring with the frequency that people think. As the NY Times article states, there have been 31 known cases of voter impersonation between 2000 and 2014. If this is happening so frequently, why aren't people getting caught left and right!? If 5 million people voted illegally in November, why haven't we had mass arrests of these folks!?

Do people vote illegally? Absolutely. Do people impersonate others and vote for them? I'm sure it happens. Does it happen with enough frequency to justify passing legislation with far-reaching implications that just so happen to disproportionately negatively affect certain groups of people? Absolutely not.

All this has been hashed out in the previous 3 pages of this thread.

What's crazy is that a college student is going to jail for committing a crime which according to many of his fellow democrats A) does not happen and B) if it does, can't happen enough to effect an election.

What on earth would make him think it was worth doing????

Also, I'm not yet collecting social security but when I do, will it require me to have ID to cash and/or deposit the check? And if it does, isn't it worth the $10 fee to be able to do so?

Haha, you cite 2 of the most liberal outlets in the history of the world. NPR = National Progressive Radio.

Sent from my SM-G900V using CSNbbs mobile app

How about if I linked the actual ruling of the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals for you? Would that be too liberal of an outlet?

https://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/u...nc-4th.pdf

Or what about a Fox news article?http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/05/15/supreme-court-rejects-appeal-over-nc-voter-id-law.html
Is that more "Fair and Balanced" for you?

You can think what you want about every news source that doesn't come from Rupert Murdoch, but the FACTS are that this law was specifically targeted at making it harder for African-Americans to vote. If you want to read all the way through the decision of the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals, it's all spelled out for you there. I figured you wouldn't want to do that, so I've now linked articles to 3 different news outlets to summarize it for you.

Requiring that someone have a photo ID to vote isn't the issue. Plenty of states have the requirement. The issue is when states place undue burdens on people voting. Saying that one government-issued ID is okay while another isn't is an undue burden. Arbitrarily restricting early voting periods is an undue burden. Arbitrarily restricting methods of registering to vote is an undue burden. North Carolina lost the appeal, and the Supreme Court refused to hear the case, in part, because North Carolina couldn't show that the new ID rule and the restrictions on early voting would do anything to stop in-person voter fraud. Not only could they not show that these new rules not stop voter fraud, but it was blatantly obvious that these new rule would have a disproportionately negative effect on African-Americans.

(08-11-2017 10:13 PM)JMUETC Wrote:  

(08-11-2017 10:03 PM)jmu14 Wrote:  

(08-11-2017 09:31 PM)olderduke Wrote:  

(08-11-2017 09:10 PM)POTUS#4 Wrote:  

(08-11-2017 08:10 PM)BleedingPurple Wrote:  That seems to have summed it up using some very simple language. I really don't know how anyone in the US can function without some official pictured form of identification. With that said, in Charlotte, no ID is required to vote. I could easily go vote during the early voting period and give my neighbor's name and address. Then on election day go and vote as the person who I am. Essentially casting a vote twice. My neighbor would show up to vote and not be able to and there is nothing showing that it was me who voted in his place during the early voting period. This is stupid.

Many states have enacted some form of valid voter ID law. NC's was tossed because of its blatantly discriminatory impact.

How was it blatantly discriminatory?

Sent from my SM-G900V using CSNbbs mobile app

NPR: http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2...ter-id-law

NY Times: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/15/us/po...olina.html

NC legislators didn't even try to hide how discriminatory this law was. There's something to be said for making sure that only those who are allowed to vote are actually voting, but these types of draconian laws are not the solution. These laws are such a drastic overreaction to a problem that is simply not occurring with the frequency that people think. As the NY Times article states, there have been 31 known cases of voter impersonation between 2000 and 2014. If this is happening so frequently, why aren't people getting caught left and right!? If 5 million people voted illegally in November, why haven't we had mass arrests of these folks!?

Do people vote illegally? Absolutely. Do people impersonate others and vote for them? I'm sure it happens. Does it happen with enough frequency to justify passing legislation with far-reaching implications that just so happen to disproportionately negatively affect certain groups of people? Absolutely not.

All this has been hashed out in the previous 3 pages of this thread.

What's crazy is that a college student is going to jail for committing a crime which according to many of his fellow democrats A) does not happen and B) if it does, can't happen enough to effect an election.

What on earth would make him think it was worth doing????

Also, I'm not yet collecting social security but when I do, will it require me to have ID to cash and/or deposit the check? And if it does, isn't it worth the $10 fee to be able to do so?

I absolutely agree that one should have a photo-ID to vote. But that's not what these laws are about. Plenty of states require a voter ID. What North Carolina tried to do was restrict the type of government-issued ID that people could use. The problem was the types they said were no longer allowed, just so happened to be types that were primarily used by minority voters. They also tried to restrict early voting, which would also happen to negatively effect minority voters.

And that JMU student's crime isn't at all what these laws say they're going to prevent. What he did was try and meet a quota for registering people. He didn't feel like actually doing it, so he put a bunch of dead peoples' names on there and turned in the list. 18 dead people to be exact. It's illegal and he should absolutely be punished for it, but what he did doesn't really have anything to do with what the NC law said it was going to combat.

(08-11-2017 10:43 PM)jmu14 Wrote:  

(08-11-2017 10:23 PM)olderduke Wrote:  

(08-11-2017 10:13 PM)JMUETC Wrote:  

(08-11-2017 10:03 PM)jmu14 Wrote:  

(08-11-2017 09:31 PM)olderduke Wrote:  How was it blatantly discriminatory?

Sent from my SM-G900V using CSNbbs mobile app

NPR: http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2...ter-id-law

NY Times: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/15/us/po...olina.html

NC legislators didn't even try to hide how discriminatory this law was. There's something to be said for making sure that only those who are allowed to vote are actually voting, but these types of draconian laws are not the solution. These laws are such a drastic overreaction to a problem that is simply not occurring with the frequency that people think. As the NY Times article states, there have been 31 known cases of voter impersonation between 2000 and 2014. If this is happening so frequently, why aren't people getting caught left and right!? If 5 million people voted illegally in November, why haven't we had mass arrests of these folks!?

Do people vote illegally? Absolutely. Do people impersonate others and vote for them? I'm sure it happens. Does it happen with enough frequency to justify passing legislation with far-reaching implications that just so happen to disproportionately negatively affect certain groups of people? Absolutely not.

All this has been hashed out in the previous 3 pages of this thread.

What's crazy is that a college student is going to jail for committing a crime which according to many of his fellow democrats A) does not happen and B) if it does, can't happen enough to effect an election.

What on earth would make him think it was worth doing????

Also, I'm not yet collecting social security but when I do, will it require me to have ID to cash and/or deposit the check? And if it does, isn't it worth the $10 fee to be able to do so?

Haha, you cite 2 of the most liberal outlets in the history of the world. NPR = National Progressive Radio.

Sent from my SM-G900V using CSNbbs mobile app

How about if I linked the actual ruling of the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals for you? Would that be too liberal of an outlet?

https://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/u...nc-4th.pdf

Or what about a Fox news article?http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/05/15/supreme-court-rejects-appeal-over-nc-voter-id-law.html
Is that more "Fair and Balanced" for you?

You can think what you want about every news source that doesn't come from Rupert Murdoch, but the FACTS are that this law was specifically targeted at making it harder for African-Americans to vote. If you want to read all the way through the decision of the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals, it's all spelled out for you there. I figured you wouldn't want to do that, so I've now linked articles to 3 different news outlets to summarize it for you.

Requiring that someone have a photo ID to vote isn't the issue. Plenty of states have the requirement. The issue is when states place undue burdens on people voting. Saying that one government-issued ID is okay while another isn't is an undue burden. Arbitrarily restricting early voting periods is an undue burden. Arbitrarily restricting methods of registering to vote is an undue burden. North Carolina lost the appeal, and the Supreme Court refused to hear the case, in part, because North Carolina couldn't show that the new ID rule and the restrictions on early voting would do anything to stop in-person voter fraud. Not only could they not show that these new rules not stop voter fraud, but it was blatantly obvious that these new rule would have a disproportionately negative effect on African-Americans.

You answer your own question. This issue is about a photo id. I would support a federally funded program, including transportation costs to allow all of these disenfranchised folks the opportunity to go get one. I'm willing to bet that you would still consider that somehow oppressive.

Sent from my SM-G900V using CSNbbs mobile app

Do the dead lives in Charlottesville matter?

lives? only 1 right?