Courts Strike Down Voter ID Laws in Wisconsin and Texas

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Well, then one could argue that democracy kills since it is what enables voting in the first place. It'd be nonsense but one could make that argument, of course. Same as the argument that casting a vote can destroy the planet. Of course, I prefer to keep it real. And when keeping it real, I say that a vote doesn't kill. Unlike a gun, it's purpose is not to do that.

[Sousuke 1,214]

Well, then one could argue that democracy kills since it is what enables voting in the first place. It'd be nonsense but one could make that argument, of course. Same as the argument that casting a vote can destroy the planet. Of course, I prefer to keep it real. And when keeping it real, I say that a vote doesn't kill. Unlike a gun, it's purpose is not to do that.

With that attitude, I don't see you as being a responsible voter. Plain and Simple. And yes, the US Nuclear Arsenal can destroy this planet (or its climate / atmosphere I should say)

Edited October 10, 2014 by Sousuke

[Sousuke 1,214]

Well, then one could argue that democracy kills since it is what enables voting in the first place. It'd be nonsense but one could make that argument, of course. Same as the argument that casting a vote can destroy the planet. Of course, I prefer to keep it real. And when keeping it real, I say that a vote doesn't kill. Unlike a gun, it's purpose is not to do that.

I'll just add that yes, a democracy gives the people the power, the weight, to kill, whereas a dictatorship the power is solely in the hands of the leader.

Edited October 10, 2014 by Sousuke

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

With that attitude, I don't see you as being a responsible voter. Plain and Simple. And yes, the US Nuclear Arsenal can destroy this planet (or its climate / atmosphere I should say)

Oh good Lord. Because I recognize that unlike a gun a vote is not designed to kill nor is it's purpose to do so, I am not a responsible voter? Only in gun aficionado world would such an argument be made. And only to a gun aficionado would that argument make any sense whatsoever. I'm sorry but that is just ridiculous.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

I'll just add that yes, a democracy gives the people the power, the weight, to kill, whereas a dictatorship the power is solely in the hands of the leader.

So tell me, who did my vote kill and how did it do that?

[Sousuke 1,214]

So tell me, who did my vote kill and how did it do that?

A vote has the power to kill. As does a gun.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

A vote has the power to kill. As does a gun.

Nonsense. If one wanted to entertain that notion, one would perhaps stipulate that millions of votes taken together might have that power. A single vote does not and never will. A single gun most certainly does. It's designed for that very purpose. A vote is not. Big difference between the two even if you can't - or refuse to - see it.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

A vote has the power to kill. As does a gun.

By the way, that's not an answer to the question you replied to.

[Sousuke 1,214]

By the way, that's not an answer to the question you replied to.

I can't answer your question because I don't have any of your details. Like what vote you are referring to etc.

Nonsense. If one wanted to entertain that notion, one would perhaps stipulate that millions of votes taken together might have that power. A single vote does not and never will. A single gun most certainly does. It's designed for that very purpose. A vote is not. Big difference between the two even if you can't - or refuse to - see it.

Well you've come about 80% to my side of the argument. Now your only arguing quantitatively the degree of power each as.

Edited October 11, 2014 by Sousuke

[Sousuke 1,214]

Nonsense. If one wanted to entertain that notion, one would perhaps stipulate that millions of votes taken together might have that power. A single vote does not and never will. A single gun most certainly does. It's designed for that very purpose. A vote is not. Big difference between the two even if you can't - or refuse to - see it.

Getting into the last 20% of the argument lets look at the Quantitive.

The Iraqi war lasted 8 years and killed lets say 1 million people (I think that is a conservative number). 50 million people voted for Bush. So spread around thats 1 death per 50 votes.

Now in those 8 years 248,000 died from gunviolence, suicide, accidents etc. 300 million guns are in America during that time. Thats 1 death per 1200 guns.

Sure in times of peace the vote is not even close to a gun, but when is the US ever at peace.

[Pooky 3,876]

If you want to get into the spirit of literalism, a gun is not designed to kill. It is designed to launch a projectile at high speed in the direction in which the barrel is pointed.

It is the human element that makes the choice about the target at which the gun is pointed.

Just as it is the voter who chooses for whom they will vote.

As always, it is the fault of the human, not the gun, not the vote. The human did it.

[Sousuke 1,214]

If you want to get into the spirit of literalism, a gun is not designed to kill. It is designed to launch a projectile at high speed in the direction in which the barrel is pointed.

It is the human element that makes the choice about the target at which the gun is pointed.

Just as it is the voter who chooses for whom they will vote.

As always, it is the fault of the human, not the gun, not the vote. The human did it.

Agree 100%

[UncleBeer 244]

The Texas judge only needed 147 pages to explain why he was blocking the ID law; careening into all sorts of bloviation about racism, discrimination etc. that the Supreme Court had already cleared Texas of. Shameless 'judicial activism' by an O'bama appointee that will ultimately be reversed. This is not a state that the Dems had any hope of winning, so what's the point?

[unsmiley 111]

Of course it does. The GnOP will do what they can to prevent some Americans to vote... That and stuffing ballots is the only way they can get elected these days..

Sheer nonsense. Of course we should prevent the unqualified (non-citizens, illegals, unregistered, non-residents in the district, criminals, those who already voted earlier in the day) to vote. If you really do not think proving your identity is important for exercising one of the most important privileges of American citizenship, we should abolish mandating IDs for ANYTHING and EVERYTHING. I mean for air travel, getting a driver's license, entering the country, opening bank accounts, during hospitalizations, returning a store purchase, working out at the gym, attending the Academy Awards, entering the White House, etc., etc., etc.

And you got it backwards -- stuffing the ballots is the Dem's specialty.

[DavenRoxy 1,073]

Oh well, at least the illegal aliens that vote at the next presidential election won't be doing it illegally, if this gets passed pretty soon...

http://www.infowars.com/new-law-would-give-illegal-immigrants-right-to-vote-collect-government-benefits/