03-29-2019, 11:56 AM
(03-28-2019, 09:05 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Funny how some folks consider a gun more dangerous than a vote. Rights are rights, but folks will try to restrict the ones they are opposed to.
Fortunately, I can say I'm pretty much consistent in the matter. I'm of the opinion that with rights come responsibility.
We can take your word for it, that you are a legally registered voter when you show up at the booth, but to exercise your 2nd; many think you need Identification, registration, background checks, and training.
Why can someone vote with 0 responsibility, but cannot arm themselves without going through hoops. Why no training required to demonstrate you know what you are doing when you vote.
The problem with this line of argument is that there has never been widespread voter fraud committed by hundreds of thousands of people who somehow obtained lists of registered voters that they somehow knew would not vote.
All restrictions on rights involve a balancing test by the courts. They have to balance the public welfare against the limitation of any right. Citizens have freedom of speech and assembly but courts have upheld things like licenses for parades or public gatherings because it is a minor limitation and it is in the best interest of the public to have some control of these situations and have people to hold responsible when they get out of hand or lead to violence. The same thing applies here. Since there is not proof of all of widespread voter fraud committed by people who somehow got the names of registered voters they knew would not vote the requirement of voter ID then there is really no damage to balance against the people who would be suppressed from voting. However when dealing with gun violence we have hundreds of thousands of cases every year and 80% of them are committed by people who are not the legal owners of the guns they use. Therefore there is a HUGE public safety problem to balance against the limited restriction of requiring licensing and registration of guns.
