51
   

May I see your papers, citizen?

 
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Fri 20 Jul, 2012 09:40 am
@ZREX,
Quote:
You gave nothing to sway my opinion or to counter my example that I admitted at posting were thin and weak(****).

Do you always base your opinion something so thin and weak? If that is your level of thought then no wonder you laugh so much.
ZREX
 
  1  
Reply Fri 20 Jul, 2012 10:21 am
@parados,
Ya maybe!!) and that also probably explains why I don t understand why it is such a debate. Having and providing a photo ID makes sense to me in more circumstances than not. That's all. Please if you have an example of when it is not good, please share. I am not sure who, but the Poll Tax was mentioned, which I believe to be a legal reason why it cannot be implemented but not a counter to the concept.


parados
 
  1  
Reply Fri 20 Jul, 2012 11:49 am
@ZREX,
To go back to what this thread is really about. Unless you can prove you are a citizen, do you think the police should be able to detain you? Do you think in America, you should be guilty of something until you prove you aren't?

0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Fri 20 Jul, 2012 12:00 pm
@ZREX,
Quote:
Having and providing a photo ID makes sense to me in more circumstances than not. That's all.

It's interesting that a group, far right conservatives, that was so against Federal IDs is now demanding every one have one.

You might want to read this -
http://www.fff.org/freedom/0294c.asp

and these -
http://www.conservativeusa.org/RFIDidentitytheft.htm
http://www.ronpaul.com/on-the-issues/civil-liberties/national-id-card/
http://www.backwoodshome.com/columns/wolfe0111.html
http://epic.org/privacy/id_cards/


I remember people threatening to take up arms over requiring the use of their SS number for identification.
RABEL222
 
  1  
Reply Fri 20 Jul, 2012 01:04 pm
@parados,
Wasting your time. He is either a rampant conservative or someone who gets his rocks off stirring up ****.
parados
 
  2  
Reply Fri 20 Jul, 2012 01:13 pm
@RABEL222,
I do find it interesting that the same people that were against National ID and having to present ID when Clinton proposed similar things are now all gung ho and don't understand why anyone would be against it.
0 Replies
 
ZREX
 
  2  
Reply Fri 20 Jul, 2012 01:14 pm
@parados,
Interesting read, thank you!!, a very good example of the flip flopping self serving jackasses in Washington, I continue to believe that an ID is a good idea
and worth further exploration. This information was not an example of an ID being bad. It does bring up what information is stored. Who has access, how it is used and of course the security of that information. That is a whole different conversation. But once again it was a good read, thank you.
parados
 
  1  
Reply Fri 20 Jul, 2012 01:19 pm
@ZREX,
Sometimes ID is a good idea. Sometimes it's an intrusion. How about you have to present an ID every time you start your car to drive somewhere just to prove that you are licensed to drive? How about you have to present your ID just to open your car door?
roger
 
  1  
Reply Fri 20 Jul, 2012 01:23 pm
@parados,
Sometimes you do. Your ID is contained in a chip on your key fob.
ZREX
 
  1  
Reply Fri 20 Jul, 2012 01:54 pm
@parados,
I too fear the intrusion and at this point do not have confidence in the feds to implement or administer a national ID at this time. Humm replace my car keys with an individual ID. Interesting concept.

You may find this humorous or not but...
While on active duty, in uniform on any base in Iraq I still had to show my ID to eat in the dinning facility. Now how ridiculous is that?
0 Replies
 
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Fri 20 Jul, 2012 02:59 pm
@roger,
roger wrote:

Sometimes you do. Your ID is contained in a chip on your key fob.

That just proves you have a key. It doesn't prove that the person with the key is a licensed driver.
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Fri 20 Jul, 2012 03:02 pm
@DrewDad,
... and a driving licence actually allows the holder of it to drive a vehicle (which is defined on that licence).
0 Replies
 
roger
 
  2  
Reply Fri 20 Jul, 2012 03:04 pm
@DrewDad,
You get in there with that key, and as far as the car is concerned, you have been identified. Not all cars are smart like you.
RABEL222
 
  1  
Reply Sat 21 Jul, 2012 10:18 am
@roger,
Cars arnt smart, they are programed like most conservatives.
0 Replies
 
hilbert
 
  1  
Reply Sat 21 Jul, 2012 12:55 pm
@maporsche,
msporsche says, "At least AZ in the same week expanded gun rights"

Yep, think about it, Sparky, during Foxnews commercials
0 Replies
 
revelette
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 Jul, 2012 10:09 am
Quote:

Summary

Ten states now have unprecedented restrictive voter ID laws. Alabama, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas,Mississippi, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Wisconsin all require citizens to produce specific types of government-issued photo identification before they can cast a vote that will count.

Legal precedent requires these states to provide free photo ID to eligible voters who do not have one

Unfortunately, these free IDs are not equally accessible to all voters. This report is the first comprehensive assessment of the difficulties that eligible voters face in obtaining free photo ID.

The 11 percent of eligible voters who lack the required photo ID must travel to a designated government office to obtain one. Yet many citizens will have trouble making this trip. In the 10 states with restrictive voter ID laws:

• Nearly 500,000 eligible voters do not have access to a vehicle and live more than 10 miles from the nearest state ID-issuing office open more than two days a week. Many of them live in rural areas with dwindling public transportation options.

• More than 10 million eligible voters live more than 10 miles from their nearest state ID-issuing office open more than two days a week.

• 1.2 million eligible black voters and 500,000 eligible Hispanic voters live more than 10 miles from their nearest ID-issuing office open more than two days a week. People of color are more likely to be disenfranchised by these laws since they are less likely to have photo ID than the general population.


• Many ID-issuing offices maintain limited business hours. For example, the office in Sauk City, Wisconsin is open only on the fifth Wednesday of any month. But only four months in 2012
— February, May, August, and October — have five Wednesdays. In other states — Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi, and Texas — many part-time ID-issuing offices are in the rural regions with the highest concentrations of people of color and people in poverty.

More than 1 million eligible voters in these states fall below the federal poverty line and live more than 10 miles from their nearest ID-issuing office open more than two days a week. These voters may be particularly affected by the significant costs of the documentation required to obtain a photo ID. Birth certificates can cost between $8 and $25. Marriage licenses, required for married women whose birth certificates include a maiden name, can cost between $8 and $20. By comparison, the notorious poll tax — outlawed during the civil rights era — cost $10.64 in current dollars.

The result is plain: Voter ID laws will make it harder for hundreds of thousands of poor Americans to vote. They place a serious burden on a core constitutional right that should be universally available to every American citizen.

This November, restrictive voter ID states will provide 127 electoral votes — nearly half of the 270 needed to win the presidency. Therefore, the ability of eligible citizens without photo ID to obtain one could have a major influence on the outcome of the 2012 election.


refrence links at the source
ZREX
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 Jul, 2012 10:35 am
@revelette,
That seems a bit restrictive, guess the get out to vote crowd should get busy giving people rides to the ID center. It would be interesting to know how far it is from their residence to the polling center. Not wanting to start the whole arguement over again. I am in faver of photo ID. I agree this is restrictive and "half baked" resolves one issue but creates another equally disturbing. Like I said the get out to vote crowd on both sides needs to get busy.
revelette
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 Jul, 2012 10:42 am
@ZREX,
Yeah I guess the vote crowd should get right on it. There shouldn't be those hurdles in being able to vote in the first place for a problem that is not a problem to begin with.
ZREX
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 Jul, 2012 10:52 am
@revelette,
Far be it from our govt to try to solve a real problem. That would require work, cooperation and most importantly a problem solving ability. Qualities non of them seem to have. But that is a entirely different can of worms. Have a great day!!)
parados
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 Jul, 2012 01:29 pm
@ZREX,
Sure... I guess some voters are more equal than others.

If you don't own a car, you don't deserve to vote. I'm curious where that was in the founding fathers' view of our republic.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.06 seconds on 12/22/2024 at 09:21:22