Repubs are failures too.

[magley64]

Try this one on.

 

Repubs are against killing unborn children but are in favor of killing serial killers.

 

Dems are in favor of murdering unborn children but are opposed to killing serial killers.

 

Just makes me want to go postal some times. Everyone wants their side to 'win'. Never mind everyone is actually losing.

 

 

Wow, it must be nice to have such a black and white view of the world... What if you aren't for killing either? or for killing both?

are you a republicat, or a democan?

[Bad324]

I've said it a million times but as we are seeing the two party system is broken beyond repair and needs done away with. There are no winners

[jbot]

please define "crazy, ineffective gun control laws"

 

also, what happens when someone who isn't supposed to vote, votes?

And what happens when someone who isn't supposed to have a gun, gets a gun?

 

what happens when you get your face out of feinstein's dusty mummy-gina?

And what happens when you at least make obama use a condom when he's balls deep inside you, filling your bowels with his creamy oreo filling?

 

please, step back from the crazy, ineffective bipartisan bukkake leavings you've been guzzling, and breathe the clean air of no longer claiming to hate laws that infringe on constitutional rights, and yet supporting them like some meth addled drug counselor.  just stop the madness.  you have to acknowledge you have a problem first before you can step towards unfucking yourself.

[Tonik]

 

 

also, what happens when someone who isn't supposed to vote, votes?

And what happens when someone who isn't supposed to have a gun, gets a gun?

 

 

You seem to keep asking that question, or a variation of it.  Your question is fundamentally flawed, so badly that it isn't even a valid question.  We should strive to fix both, because neither is acceptable.

[magley64]

You seem to keep asking that question, or a variation of it.  Your question is fundamentally flawed, so badly that it isn't even a valid question.  We should strive to fix both, because neither is acceptable.

 

 

I'm talking about the effects of not addressing the issues. do the effects matter?

Edited November 14, 2013 by magley64

[Tonik]

What gun control issues? What are we trying to prevent that current laws can't?

 

Oh man, you phrased that question wrong. You need to edit it. There are plenty of things the current laws are not preventing, the question is will new laws prevent them.

 

What are we trying to prevent that a new law would prevent.

[turnone]

Can't argue with facts... lol

 

I wish this were true

[turnone]

i see just as many facts being posted to support that voter ID laws (which I am against, btw) are for the purpose of suppressing minority votes as I do for the idea that it reduces voter fraud.

 

This is exactly the problem.  One side lists things as facts when they aren't.  I'd love to see some real facts that supports the idea that Voter ID prevents a real problem of in person voter fraud.  Because I see in person voter fraud as a non issue.  Or, it's discussed amongst the Rebulican machine as HUGE problem that must be solved.

 

Let me pose a Hypothetical.  Let's say that it would benefit the Democrats by having Voter ID laws.  Therefore it is more likely the Democrats would push for legislation requiring them.  What would the Republican argument be?  You know they would be against it.  I think they would say something along the lines of:   The CONSTITUTION guarantees everyone the right to vote and it doesn't say shit about having an STATE issued ID to do it.  That damn Government is trying to FORCE you to get an ID just to exercise your rights.  See, Government is bad.

 

And despite how many people call the Obama voters 'sheep', many feel that whatever the Republican machine spouts, gets absorbed and repeated across the AM airwaves and fills up my FB stream.  It's not too difficult to come up with counter arguments and like it has been done in this thread, using False Equivalencies.  Abortion and Gun control aren't related enough to discuss them together.

[magley64]

What gun control issues? What are we trying to prevent that current laws can't?

 

I havent gotten a reponse from Jinu as to what constitutes crazy new gun laws...

 

 

Oh man, you phrased that question wrong. You need to edit it. There are plenty of things the current laws are not preventing, the question is will new laws prevent them.

 

What are we trying to prevent that a new law would prevent.

 

Or what a new law would purport to prevent... Voter ID laws are purported by their supporters to prevent voter fraud, but what they are really trying to prevent is democrats voting.

 

Gun control laws (background checks, gun registration, etc) are purported to keep people who shouldn't have guns from getting them. Background checks for the very large, legal distribution network of firearms retail sales, and gun registration for the very large legal network of second hand sales.

[jbot]

This is exactly the problem.  One side lists things as facts when they aren't.  I'd love to see some real facts that supports the idea that Voter ID prevents a real problem of in person voter fraud.  Because I see in person voter fraud as a non issue.  Or, it's discussed amongst the Rebulican machine as HUGE problem that must be solved.

 

Let me pose a Hypothetical.  Let's say that it would benefit the Democrats by having Voter ID laws.  Therefore it is more likely the Democrats would push for legislation requiring them.  What would the Republican argument be?  You know they would be against it.  I think they would say something along the lines of:   The CONSTITUTION guarantees everyone the right to vote and it doesn't say shit about having an STATE issued ID to do it.  That damn Government is trying to FORCE you to get an ID just to exercise your rights.  See, Government is bad.

 

And despite how many people call the Obama voters 'sheep', many feel that whatever the Republican machine spouts, gets absorbed and repeated across the AM airwaves and fills up my FB stream.  It's not too difficult to come up with counter arguments and like it has been done in this thread, using False Equivalencies.  Abortion and Gun control aren't related enough to discuss them together.

 

regarding the "facts", i havent seen many "facts" posted to show that the voter id laws were meant to suppress minority votes... which is about as much (qualitative and quantitative) "facts" that has been posted to support voter id laws actually do any meaningful to deter voter fraud, which is a minuscule problem.

the bigger problem is, you're still looking at this from a "my team vs your team perspective".

 

I havent gotten a reponse from Jinu as to what constitutes crazy new gun laws...

 

 

 

Or what a new law would purport to prevent... Voter ID laws are purported by their supporters to prevent voter fraud, but what they are really trying to prevent is democrats voting.

 

Gun control laws (background checks, gun registration, etc) are purported to keep people who shouldn't have guns from getting them. Background checks for the very large, legal distribution network of firearms retail sales, and gun registration for the very large legal network of second hand sales.

 

i don't know what you mean by  "crazy new gun laws".  i said crazy, ineffective gun laws.  what response do you need?  re-read the hundreds of pages of gun control debates, many of which we've both participated in the past.  did you forget about all those?  that would make sense since it aligns with your constant flip flopping philosophy.  again though, you miss my brilliant, genius, awesomesauce forest for your magdorian trees.

[turnone]

regarding the "facts", i havent seen many "facts" posted to show that the voter id laws were meant to suppress minority votes... which is about as much (qualitative and quantitative) "facts" that has been posted to support voter id laws actually do any meaningful to deter voter fraud, which is a minuscule problem.

the bigger problem is, you're still looking at this from a "my team vs your team perspective".

 

True you haven't because it is very hard to prove intent.  The burden should lie with those who are trying to add new laws.  Surprising how so many that hate laws and love freedom agree that more laws are the answer here.

But let's take a walk and hold hands, maybe we can get to the same finish line together.  I would have said ride scooters, but we know that my Honda is faster than your Zuma.

 

Some facts (I can gather links and supporting evidence if you don't think these are facts)

Republicans are the ONLY party pushing for Voter ID laws.

People and Parties do what's in their self interest.

Republicans are claiming that their intentions are noble and are only trying to solve a problem.  We all know that Republicans love legislation to solve problems.  (BS)

Some Republicans have been caught on camera stating that they were going to win elections by preventing Democrats from voting.

Those without state issued ID's are likely to be the most disenfranchised members of our society.  Those who have unstable employment or housing or poor records will be hurt the most.  Voting is a RIGHT. 

Old white people are the most likely to vote in any election.

Low voter turnout = Republican win (almost always).

 

I'm not on either TEAM.  I am for the truth.  Frankly I can't believe that so many agree that Voter ID is necessary when it is clear that there isn't a problem.  So creating legislation that prevents people from voting, or makes it more difficult to vote, to solve a problem that FACTUALLY doesn't exist, smells like corruption and cheating to win elections.  Someone earlier in this thread, and many others probably agree, that Obama 'stole' the election, simply because their side didn't win. 

 

I agree that most people see this as a team issue.  And scientific study shows we believe and justify what our team does and if the other team did exactly the same thing, we would oppose it, but since our team did it, it was okay.  That's the true sheep mentality we must all fight.  Unfortunately, most people aren't familiar with this bias, and could care less to learn.

Edited November 14, 2013 by turnone

[madcat6183]

what happens when you get your face out of feinstein's dusty mummy-gina?

And what happens when you at least make obama use a condom when he's balls deep inside you, filling your bowels with his creamy oreo filling?

 

please, step back from the crazy, ineffective bipartisan bukkake leavings you've been guzzling, and breathe the clean air of no longer claiming to hate laws that infringe on constitutional rights, and yet supporting them like some meth addled drug counselor.  just stop the madness.  you have to acknowledge you have a problem first before you can step towards unfucking yourself.

Here is what I got from this post....  Feinstein has a hairy nana, and Obama loves to goes raw dawg ass to mouth on magz.  Is that the gist of it, or did I miss more?

 

Jbot sometimes I read your shit, usually because Craig makes me go there right away, and I almost piss my pants.  Sad thing is, then you go off on some other tangent that is full of intelligent shit and it makes me mad.  Just make me laugh, who gives a shit about politics, guns, babies, you know, boring shit.

[smashweights]

Bros, I hate to break it to you, but murder and voter fraud are already against the law.  They can't happen as a result.  All your data is flawed.

[jbot]

True you haven't because it is very hard to prove intent.  The burden should lie with those who are trying to add new laws.  Surprising how so many that hate laws and love freedom agree that more laws are the answer here.

But let's take a walk and hold hands, maybe we can get to the same finish line together.  I would have said ride scooters, but we know that my Honda is faster than your Zuma.

 

Some facts (I can gather links and supporting evidence if you don't think these are facts)

Republicans are the ONLY party pushing for Voter ID laws.

People and Parties do what's in their self interest.

Republicans are claiming that their intentions are noble and are only trying to solve a problem.  We all know that Republicans love legislation to solve problems.  (BS)

Some Republicans have been caught on camera stating that they were going to win elections by preventing Democrats from voting.

Those without state issued ID's are likely to be the most disenfranchised members of our society.  Those who have unstable employment or housing or poor records will be hurt the most.  Voting is a RIGHT. 

Old white people are the most likely to vote in any election.

Low voter turnout = Republican win (almost always).

 

I'm not on either TEAM.  I am for the truth.  Frankly I can't believe that so many agree that Voter ID is necessary when it is clear that there isn't a problem.  So creating legislation that prevents people from voting, or makes it more difficult to vote, to solve a problem that FACTUALLY doesn't exist, smells like corruption and cheating to win elections.  Someone earlier in this thread, and many others probably agree, that Obama 'stole' the election, simply because their side didn't win. 

 

I agree that most people see this as a team issue.  And scientific study shows we believe and justify what our team does and if the other team did exactly the same thing, we would oppose it, but since our team did it, it was okay.  That's the true sheep mentality we must all fight.  Unfortunately, most people aren't familiar with this bias, and could care less to learn.

 

that honda has ~25cc more than my zuma!  that's approx 20% bigger displacement. that's like racing your panigale against a 999. besides, that ginger assclown who was riding it isn't a real human being, so that race doesn't count anyway.

 

as for the rest of your post, i agree with some and disagree with some.  i generally agree that it would be naive to think the voter ID law wasn't pushed, in some part, to suppress the minority vote. that said, i don't think it's the sole reason.

 

line by line responses to what you believe are facts, in the order you listed them:

 

1. for all intents and purposes, there are only 2 parties. so 1 out of 2 parties (that matter) support voter id laws. i guess it's a fact, but i don't think that particular fact (although i'm sure a democrat can be found that supported/supports it) has quite the ring to it that you were hoping for.

2. that would make sense., but i'll wait to see where you go with this.

3. sounds like more of a zing than a fact. it could be argued that while the last election didn't seem close, in certain crucial areas, it was. i think it's bullshit, but looking at it from the perspective that a few votes in key places could've changed the outcome, it makes sense to call it a problem.

4. i could make the claim that obama hates magdor because he cracked a joke about special olympics. or, more relevant to this topic, people on social networking saying they voted multiple times.  that means all democrats voted multiple times. but it wouldn't be true, and only a fact as it pertains to those people on camera.

5. i agree. it's a stupid law.

6. yes.

7. i'll take your word for it.

 

those 7 lines haven't really swayed me one way or the other, other than that white people are evil, and should be stopped.

 

i agree with most of the rest.

[ohiomike]

We have been focused on the failure known as Obamacare, lets shift our focus shall we. The Repubs have their own epic failure going on too. You remember, they passed all these voter id laws so they can keep people of color from voting?

 

You guessed it. Fail.

 

 

http://www.cnn.com/2013/11/12/opinion/preston-texas-id-laws/index.html?hpt=hp_t4

Political failings are non partisan crossing the aisle constantly.  Very few politicians give a crap for anything other than their re election and how much it profits them.

[Strictly Street]

I'm gonna shorten your list to those cases that in person voter fraud that would be stopped with voter ID laws.

1.

Did I miss any?

Your listing proves that having data doesn't necessarily prove your point.

 

Rather it proves the original point of without data there is nothing  to report.

 

If you used a utility bill as proof of eligibility there is no record at all.

Are you a citizen? Are you registered to vote? Are you a felon not entitled to vote?

There is no way of knowing.

 

The rather long listing does prove that people will try to cheat the system.

Granted these are just the ones that got caught, there could be others.

 

I never did get the argument that voter registration was racist.

Unless all non-eligible people are of the same race which does seem to be a little far fetched.

Or  perhaps the argument is that Mexican nationals can't vote is racist against them.

[prekarious]

Have to have id for obamacare....

Have to have id to buy cigarettes, alcohol, get into certain movies, get prescriptions, rent a car, a hotel room, cash a check...

Most states have laws in place saying that you must have at minimum a state / gov't issued id to present to law enforcement when asked...

So yeah needing an id to vote is just somehow inconceivably wrong, racist, and anti democratic.  Yep thats it. 

[magley64]

 

I never did get the argument that voter registration was racist.

Unless all non-eligible people are of the same race which does seem to be a little far fetched.

Or  perhaps the argument is that Mexican nationals can't vote is racist against them.

Nobody is talking about voter registration... they are talking about voter ID laws.

Many eligible people are already registered, and have been registered, but don't have a photo ID.

 

 

Have to have id for obamacare....

No you don't

Have to have id to buy cigarettes, alcohol, get into certain movies, get prescriptions, rent a car, a hotel room, cash a check...

None of those are your civic duty, none of those affect policy...

Most states have laws in place saying that you must have at minimum a state / gov't issued id to present to law enforcement when asked...

Bullshit, name 20...

So yeah needing an id to vote is just somehow inconceivably wrong, racist, and anti democratic.  Yep thats it.

It's unecessary, and addresses nothing more than a statistical anomoly, while disenfranchising a number of voters.

[Pokey]

 

Nobody is talking about voter registration... they are talking about voter ID laws.

Many eligible people are already registered, and have been registered, but don't have a photo ID.

 

 

No you don't

None of those are your civic duty, none of those affect policy...

Bullshit, name 20...

It's unecessary, and addresses nothing more than a statistical anomoly, while disenfranchising a number of voters.

 

Once again.....your perfect little world which you seem to find few faults with anything.

[magley64]

Once again.....your perfect little world which you seem to find few faults with anything.

 

So you can't find any faults with the premises, or the logic stemming from them... so you take a thinly veiled pot shot at me as being somehow naive to the needs of these types of laws.

[prekarious]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_and_Identify_statutes

 

So when you go to hospital, Dr office, or pharmacy they don't require a photo id along with your insurance card? Interesting.

 

As far as civic duty that potentially effects policy that is more reason to ensure that you have actual citizens involved.  Not people who have not earned the right to make these decisions.

 

Should have remembered that trying to have a debate with a liberal is about as easy as explaining the color red to a person who was born blind.  I'm done in this thread, have fun with it

[ReconRat]

 Bullshit, name 20...

Made me look. It's case law in the United States, no state law needed. Although 5 states have actual laws.

 

The authority to detain on reasonable suspicion was established in Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1

 

(1968), and does not depend on the existence of a law that specifically authorizes such a detention, so that authority exists in all jurisdictions in the United States.

 

Ergo, lack of identification is reasonable suspicion to a reasonable law enforcement officer in a reasonable situation requiring it. And the courts generally uphold that reasoning. Unless unreasonable...