ID laws halted becuase they are racist

Cowgirl Up said:
How does it target a minority or students if we all have to do it? I'm a student and I had to show my ID along with the older person that was in front of me in line.
Click to expand...
Do you attend college in your home state? Some Red states are trying to force students to register their cars in that state if they want to vote.
 
Cowgirl Up said:
I don't know why it's considered racist to require an ID to vote. It's not like the rule is only for specific races or anything like that. I had to show ID earlier this week to vote and I'm a white girl in rural Texas.
Click to expand...

I voted in a local election, last month, and had to show an ID also.
I expect I'll also be required to show one, when I vote in the Presidential election.
 
Althea said:
You have a right to bear the types of arms that don't require a license. All citizens have the right to vote.
Click to expand...

Since you're talking of buying from a private seller, then let those with no ID's vote through a private voting set up.
Of course, they will need to show an ID to have that vote counted.
 
Cowgirl Up said:
And are still having their constitutionality challenged and debated
Click to expand...

You might as well give it up; because she has no reasoning and only falls back on what she believes the Supreme Court is saying.
If the Supreme Court ruled that Desh had to surrender to be euthanized, she would willingly submit; because the Court said so.

:facepalm:
 
Althea said:
Nobody disagrees with the concept of proving ID in order to vote. The issue is Red states changing what have been long accepted forms of ID, for new ID that they either don't have the capacity to distribute to the targeted voters, or they have placed a cost on obtaining one. Some states make unreasonable demands on students, in an attempt to dissuade them from voting.

I invite you to carry a handgun in public without the proper license, and cite your 2nd amendment right when you are found guilty in a court of law.
Click to expand...

Why did you add the part of being found guilty; because carrying a handgun in public is not illegal, in all States?
 
evince said:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Click to expand...

Same question? Why then have the courts ruled time after time that its the PEOPLE who have this right of self defense? "Well Regulated" at the time it was drafted simply meant "well functioning" and in no way grants the Government the right, either implied or explicit, to regulate THE PEOPLE..i.e., MILITIA in relation to having the right to bear arms....as that right was included by the PEOPLE/STATES (those people who actually ratified the 2nd amendment as a firewall against the federal government usurping THE PEOPLE'S rights)..i.e, the super majority STATES...to defend themselves against GOVERNMENT should the need arise as it did in the revolutionary war. Its not rocket science....the constitution is a negative document in the fact that it places limits on the power and scope of the central government...not the PEOPLE/STATES (see Amendment 10). Anything not "literally" written in that negative document....is the property of the STATE/PEOPLE to regulate...not the federal courts.

The founders defined the exact reason as to why this right was included in the States Bill of Rights...it was to defend against tyranny both domestic and foreign.
 
Last edited:
evince said:
eat shit stupid cock gobbler
Click to expand...

You want me to cite laws that pertain to someone having the right to "eat shit stupid cock gobbler"??

Is that what you were talking about??

Maybe the situation would be more clear, if you could learn how to use the quote feature and stop expecting everyone to know what you're referring to. :dunno:
 
evince said:
http://www.dw.com/en/us-judges-stri...states/a-19439443?maca=en-rss-en-all-1573-rdf




US judges strike down voter ID restrictions in three states

Judges have rejected voter identification laws in three US states, including North Carolina, Kansas and Wisconsin. Critics said the laws restricted voting rights for poor people and those from minority communities.

Wahlkabine USA Wähler



The North Carolina General Assembly "enacted legislation that restricted voting and registration in five different ways, all of which disproportionately affected African Americans," federal judge Diana Motz wrote in her ruling.

The measure, which was signed into law by North Carolina's Republican Governor Patrick McCrory in August 2013 was approved "with discriminatory intent," the ruling said. The new law required voters at polls starting 2016 to show photo identity cards, "which African American voters disproportionately lacked and eliminated or reduced registration and voting access tools that African Americans disproportionately used," Motz said.

The North Carolina voting law limited the number of acceptable photo IDs to six, reduced early voting and eliminated same-day registration. Supporters of the law said the restriction for IDs would help combat voter fraud, but critics, like the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the NCAAP say the measure discriminates against minority voters and poor people, who are less likely to have drivers' licenses, for example.



Kansas, Wisconsin follow suit

Similarly in Kansas, which traditionally votes Republican, a judge ordered the state to count thousands of votes in local and state elections from people who did not provide proof of US citizenship when they registered.

The ruling was a response to Kansas Secretary of State Kris Krobach's proposed rule to prevent illegal residents from voting. But the judge's decision meant around 17,000 voters would have their ballots counted in the upcoming elections for the state legislature. Supporters say there have been few cases of fraud in the past.

In Wisconsin, considered a swing state, US Judge James Peterson ordered the state to quickly issue election IDs to people who were lacking required documents such as birth certificates. He struck down restrictions on early and absentee voting, saying they discriminated against blacks. He removed a prohibition on using expired student IDs for voting and on distributing absentee ballots by fax or email.

Voting standards in the US are agreed upon at a local level and come under scrutiny before presidential polls in the so-called swing states, where voters may choose either Democrats or Republicans. African Americans have been reliable Democrat voters, and party members believe the voter identification law may be a ploy to suppress their vote.

The latest rulings follow a recent decision by a New Orleans court to ease restrictions on the voter ID law in Texas, which critics consider
Click to expand...

Yeah right...a poor person can't afford a free ID card.......shaking my head.
 
Last edited:
USFREEDOM911 said:
Why did you add the part of being found guilty; because carrying a handgun in public is not illegal, in all States?
Click to expand...
It is illegal to carry a handgun without a permit in many states. The Constitution says nothing about carrying a handgun without/with a permit. Go try to use the 2nd amendment as a defense when you are convicted of illegal possession of a handgun.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top