Concealed weapon permits allowed, Student ID's not?

[Shama_okami]

Old Blue Collar Joe

Shama_okami

Old Blue Collar Joe

Shama_okami

Old Blue Collar Joe

I am still waiting for a legitimate objection to someone being required to provide an ID to vote.

Because the number of cases involving in-person voter fraud is so ridiculously low that any such requirement can only do more harm than good. If you prevent 100 people from voting to stop 1 fraudulent vote you are not protecting the integrity of the process, you are destroying it.

So we're going to run down the slippery slope of a mythical situation that it makes it hard to vote because they need an ID? Seriously? It's also why I stated that we should give a voting only ID to citizens to allow them to vote.

No. We're going down the road of facts. Namely the cases of in-person voter fraud (the only type an ID would prevent) is so low as to be virtually non-existent while the number of people being blocked or disenfranchised from voting by voter ID laws is in the thousands.

You need to re-read the article. NO numbers presented were presented as facts. 'Possibly' 'might' and other such words are not factual comments, but hypothetical estimates of what they want you to believe to scare the ******** out of people, all the while utterly ignoring that yeah, as close as some of our elections are that 'virtually non-existent' number, which, by the way, they never present that number, can, indeed be critical in determining the outcome of an election.

There are other sources of information. Such as PolitiFact using the Texas AG's records and finding only 18 cases from August 2002 to September 2012 where voter ID might have helped.

ABCNews had a bit more to say.

Quote:

Over the past decade Texas has convicted 51 people of voter fraud, according the state's Attorney General Greg Abbott. Only four of those cases were for voter impersonation, the only type of voter fraud that voter ID laws prevent.

Nationwide that rate of voter impersonation is even lower.

Out of the 197 million votes cast for federal candidates between 2002 and 2005, only 40 voters were indicted for voter fraud, according to a Department of Justice study outlined during a 2006 Congressional hearing. Only 26 of those cases, or about .00000013 percent of the votes cast, resulted in convictions or guilty pleas.

[Chesapeake Cannibal]

I guess it would be bad if you didnt have the papers needed to get an id but really its not that hard. When I got mine all I needed was my birth certificate, my ss card and 15 dollars and I got it the same day since im under 18.

[David2074]

Omnileech

David2074

Omnileech

David2074

"So to put it simply, this is a law that clearly attempts to make it easier for conservatives to vote while it makes it harder for the educated youth to vote. I would love to hear the defense for this nonsensical bullshit."

Well, okay, seems pretty obvious to me though.
The article states that the student IDs don't have the required information on them.
I'm also pretty sure you don't even have to prove you are a US citizen to get a student ID.

On the other hand I have my concealed carry permit from WA state.
To get it I had to provide government issued photo ID, a full set of fingerprints and submit to local and FBI background checks. And yes, it has my address on it.
I don't use it to vote with but between that and a student ID I can see why it would be more likely to qualify. It has nothing to do with whether or not I am conservative. It has to do with what was required to get the two IDs.

This is really mountain out of a mole hill. It may be one of the approved forms of ID for voting but I seriously doubt many folks are using it. Most folks with a carry permit also have a driver's license. Likewise, most students have or should have either a DL or a state issued ID. It's difficult to function in life without one since they are required for opening bank accounts, cashing checks, buying booze and so on.

You don't even have to prove you are a US citizen to get a concealed carry permit.

This isn't a mountain out of a mole hill. Why should you be required to spend any money practice a fundamental right. You aren't required to have an ID. You aren't required to keep your ID current. If someone wishes to live without driving, buying booze, opening bank accounts, cashing checks, etc. Then they CAN. Those aren't constitutional rights and voting is.

If you would look at various articles about which citizens would be inconvenienced by requiring to show Photo ID to vote, then you would see it is a fairly large number. And I have yet to see any proponent of mandating showing photo ID who can even prove that election fraud is an issue under the status quo! They often don't even try because reality doesn't back their beliefs or assertions.

Having worked as an election official for several years, I can see why it's not an issue and there are many failsafes already in place to catch fraud that work just fine to deter election fraud as it's a really obvious crime.

Actually, yes, you do have to be a citizen to get a concealed carry license - at least in WA state. It's late and I'm too tired to try to verify other states. The exception is you can also be a permanent resident with proper permanent resident card.

How to get your license: Concealed pistol license
Requirements

You must meet all of the following requirements to get a concealed pistol license (RCW 9.41.070):

Be 21 years of age or older at time of application.
Be a United States citizen or a permanent resident alien with permanent resident card (green card).
Have no pending trial, appeal, or sentencing on a charge that would prohibit you from having a license.
Have no outstanding warrants for any charge, from any court.
Have no court order or injunction against possessing a firearm.
Have never been adjudicated mentally defective or incompetent to manage your own affairs.
Have never been committed to a mental institution.
Have no felony convictions, or adjudications for a felony offense, in this state or elsewhere. “Felony” means any felony offense under the laws of Washington, or any federal or out-of-state offense comparable to a felony offense under the laws of Washington.
Within the past year, haven’t been an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana, depressants, stimulants, narcotics, or any other controlled substance.
Haven’t been convicted of 3 or more violations of Washington’s firearms laws within any 5-year period.
Haven’t been dishonorably discharged from the armed forces.
Aren’t currently subject to a court order restraining you from harassing, stalking, or threatening your child, an intimate partner, or the child of an intimate partner.
Have never renounced your United States citizenship.
Have no convictions for any of the following crimes committed by one family member against another:
Assault IV
Coercion
Stalking
Reckless Endangerment
Criminal Trespass in the first degree
Violation of the provisions of a protection order or no-contact order restraining the person or excluding the person from the residence

The thrust of this article was that allowing carry permits to be one of the forms of ID accepted at the polls is somehow supporting a particular agenda / viewpoint. I was simply pointing out a carry permit is actually a fairly decent form of ID because you have to prove who you are to get one. The one problem I have with it for other things (like voting) is that at least the ones in WA state do not have a photo on it. However they could at least compare my signature on the carry permit with the signature on my voter registration card.

I've heard your argument before but to me the only valid part might be to make an ID required for voting available at no cost. I don't agree that no ID at all is a good idea. Otherwise how do you prove it is really a particular eligible individual casting his vote and not some other person doing it in his stead? SOME people (a few) may choose to live without any kind of acceptable government issued ID. But they are an extremely small minority because most of us live in the real world and do drive and have bank accounts or want to cash paychecks and so on. For those few, sure, give them some sort of free government issued ID so they can vote without having to pay money.

I asserted that non-citizens can get a CCW. You confirmed it. Resident aliens are ineligible to vote, and such having a CCW is no guarantee that the holder is even a citizen. Same with that student ID, and yet you dislike the idea of student ids being an acceptable ID because there's no guarantee the holder is a citizen...

Electioneer officials are not qualified to judge handwriting or signatures and being basically volunteers, are in no position to disallow someone based on handwriting. Nor would a photo ID be any use at all because no one is required to submit a picture of themselves when they register. The whole point of a photo ID is to show that you look like whoever is on the ID.

As I already posted in the thread as many as 1 in 10 people in Texas do not have the required ID to vote and that is a lot of people. Nor do legislators in most states have any interest in their states paying massive amounts of money to make IDs free to all. It would go against their voting suppression tactics of making registration harder, eliminating or reducing early voting etc. Furthermore every citizen, even the homeless can vote. No ID would match their situation like living situation. Why the hell shouldn't they have a right to vote?

Maybe you should look at states that do not require Photo ID and ask yourself why if there is no requirement to show an ID, why is there practically no instances of voter fraud? Probably because if one is caught it is severe, you create a paper trail in doing voter fraud with plenty of evidence, and in order to pull if off one would have to know the district that the person you'd be impersonating and hope you get there before they do, because if it turns out they voted first then the poll workers would probably call the cops right then and there.

Citizenship -
I said it wrong the first time. You don't have to be a citizen to get a concealed carry but you do have to prove what your status is, thereby letting them (the gov) know whether you are or are not a citizen.

Neither a DL or a concealed carry permit is verifying your citizenship. It is a form of ID to help verify who you are. You (supposedly) had to prove citizenship when you registered to vote.
This is indirect - at least in WA state -
http://www.sos.wa.gov/_assets/elections/VRF_English_Fillable_WEB.pdf
On the voter registration form you have to sign saying you are a citizen. However you also have to either provide the last four of your SSN or give your WA DL number - and showing what your citizenship status is is part of the DL application process. Presumably they cross check the database to see if you are either actually a citizen or just in the country legally by some other means. In other words, you don't have to be a citizen to get a DL but you do have to show whether or not you are a citizen.

In other words, neither a DL or a concealed carry permit proves you are a citizen but the process for getting either one of those documents requires you to show what your status is. Therefore in one database or the other you have gone on record as either proving you are a citizen or proving you are not. Proof of citizenship is checked when getting on the voter registration list. At the polls it is simply a matter of proving you are that person.

Electioneer officials are not qualified to judge handwriting or signatures
I can't speak for you personally but YES, some of them ARE qualified to judge handwriting. At least here in WA state. We use an absentee ballot system and you sign the outer envelope and there is a place to put your phone number or email address so they can contact you if they think your signature does not match what they have on records. I have talked to the ladies in the courthouse processing the ballots who remove the outer outer envelope (the part folks would see in the mailbox - then verify the signature on the second envelope inside that - then remove the innermost envelope which has your sealed ballot in it (no name) and place it with the others for processing. The point being is they do check signatures against what they have on record. Back when we actually walked into the polls and voted in person they would check your signature on the sheet against what they had on file. I can not speak for how all states do it. I'll also say that back when we voted in person I assume that if there was a question of fraud on you signature it got bumped up to someone with more training on handwriting recognition. But they did check.

I agree it is not a perfect system. But if you agree that only US citizens should vote in US elections how do you verify they are US citizens without any form of identification? Just arguing "Well, it hasn't been much of a problem so far" is not really much of an argument. It isn't much of a problem because most states have some sort of verification system in place. If you go to a system where people are not required to have ID / prove who they are to either register to vote or in the actual voting then yes, I think cheating would become more common. And if a person has proof of who they are to register to vote then they have proof of who they are to vote.

I agree states don't want to hand out free ID cards. However if you are going to argue that
1.Voting is a constitutional right and there should be no fee required
2.States should require some form of ID to prove people are obeying the laws they put in place about who can vote -
then that leaves -
3. If they are going to require an ID they should provide it for free to folks who don't already have some acceptable form of ID like a DL.
Personally I think state issued ID should be free of charge. The majority of folks will pay for a DL. But for those who don't the state typically wants them to have ID for a variety of reasons so it benefits both the state and the person to make sure they have one.

So - back to the original points the article was making about how not accepting student ID but accepting conceal carry permits for voting is some sort of secret agenda to block some types of people and allow others .....

I think the biggest issue with student ID would be -
1. Many states require government issued ID and a student ID card is not government issued.
2. The reason many states require government issued ID (for voting, buying booze, opening a bank account etc.) is that it narrows down the number of types of documents the person reviewing the ID needs to be trained to recognize and the variety of ID numbers they are trying to keep in a database. Some places won't even accept out of state ID because there are just too many variations in DL / ID across the states. If you add to that every community college and vo-tech you've never even heard of it becomes virtually impossible to know if the ID is valid or in some cases if the institution issuing it even exists.

And that is at the polls. If you are talking about using student ID to register to vote then the problem also becomes that getting a student ID does not require you to prove what your status is in the country (citizen, resident alien, illegal, etc.) Getting a DL or concealed carry permit does. Thus even though you don't have to be a citizen to get a DL or CC you do have to go on record as to what your status is. They cross check the database and if you have not proved you are a citizen you don't get registered to vote. But they need that DL number or SSN or CC# to have a point to cross reference you in the database(s).

[zaptar19]

scholars-no votes for you
Gunmen-Oh no go right on ahead with helping make our laws.

[Omnileech]

David2074

Omnileech

David2074

Omnileech

David2074

"So to put it simply, this is a law that clearly attempts to make it easier for conservatives to vote while it makes it harder for the educated youth to vote. I would love to hear the defense for this nonsensical bullshit."

Well, okay, seems pretty obvious to me though.
The article states that the student IDs don't have the required information on them.
I'm also pretty sure you don't even have to prove you are a US citizen to get a student ID.

On the other hand I have my concealed carry permit from WA state.
To get it I had to provide government issued photo ID, a full set of fingerprints and submit to local and FBI background checks. And yes, it has my address on it.
I don't use it to vote with but between that and a student ID I can see why it would be more likely to qualify. It has nothing to do with whether or not I am conservative. It has to do with what was required to get the two IDs.

This is really mountain out of a mole hill. It may be one of the approved forms of ID for voting but I seriously doubt many folks are using it. Most folks with a carry permit also have a driver's license. Likewise, most students have or should have either a DL or a state issued ID. It's difficult to function in life without one since they are required for opening bank accounts, cashing checks, buying booze and so on.

You don't even have to prove you are a US citizen to get a concealed carry permit.

This isn't a mountain out of a mole hill. Why should you be required to spend any money practice a fundamental right. You aren't required to have an ID. You aren't required to keep your ID current. If someone wishes to live without driving, buying booze, opening bank accounts, cashing checks, etc. Then they CAN. Those aren't constitutional rights and voting is.

If you would look at various articles about which citizens would be inconvenienced by requiring to show Photo ID to vote, then you would see it is a fairly large number. And I have yet to see any proponent of mandating showing photo ID who can even prove that election fraud is an issue under the status quo! They often don't even try because reality doesn't back their beliefs or assertions.

Having worked as an election official for several years, I can see why it's not an issue and there are many failsafes already in place to catch fraud that work just fine to deter election fraud as it's a really obvious crime.

Actually, yes, you do have to be a citizen to get a concealed carry license - at least in WA state. It's late and I'm too tired to try to verify other states. The exception is you can also be a permanent resident with proper permanent resident card.

How to get your license: Concealed pistol license
Requirements

You must meet all of the following requirements to get a concealed pistol license (RCW 9.41.070):

Be 21 years of age or older at time of application.
Be a United States citizen or a permanent resident alien with permanent resident card (green card).
Have no pending trial, appeal, or sentencing on a charge that would prohibit you from having a license.
Have no outstanding warrants for any charge, from any court.
Have no court order or injunction against possessing a firearm.
Have never been adjudicated mentally defective or incompetent to manage your own affairs.
Have never been committed to a mental institution.
Have no felony convictions, or adjudications for a felony offense, in this state or elsewhere. “Felony” means any felony offense under the laws of Washington, or any federal or out-of-state offense comparable to a felony offense under the laws of Washington.
Within the past year, haven’t been an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana, depressants, stimulants, narcotics, or any other controlled substance.
Haven’t been convicted of 3 or more violations of Washington’s firearms laws within any 5-year period.
Haven’t been dishonorably discharged from the armed forces.
Aren’t currently subject to a court order restraining you from harassing, stalking, or threatening your child, an intimate partner, or the child of an intimate partner.
Have never renounced your United States citizenship.
Have no convictions for any of the following crimes committed by one family member against another:
Assault IV
Coercion
Stalking
Reckless Endangerment
Criminal Trespass in the first degree
Violation of the provisions of a protection order or no-contact order restraining the person or excluding the person from the residence

The thrust of this article was that allowing carry permits to be one of the forms of ID accepted at the polls is somehow supporting a particular agenda / viewpoint. I was simply pointing out a carry permit is actually a fairly decent form of ID because you have to prove who you are to get one. The one problem I have with it for other things (like voting) is that at least the ones in WA state do not have a photo on it. However they could at least compare my signature on the carry permit with the signature on my voter registration card.

I've heard your argument before but to me the only valid part might be to make an ID required for voting available at no cost. I don't agree that no ID at all is a good idea. Otherwise how do you prove it is really a particular eligible individual casting his vote and not some other person doing it in his stead? SOME people (a few) may choose to live without any kind of acceptable government issued ID. But they are an extremely small minority because most of us live in the real world and do drive and have bank accounts or want to cash paychecks and so on. For those few, sure, give them some sort of free government issued ID so they can vote without having to pay money.

I asserted that non-citizens can get a CCW. You confirmed it. Resident aliens are ineligible to vote, and such having a CCW is no guarantee that the holder is even a citizen. Same with that student ID, and yet you dislike the idea of student ids being an acceptable ID because there's no guarantee the holder is a citizen...

Electioneer officials are not qualified to judge handwriting or signatures and being basically volunteers, are in no position to disallow someone based on handwriting. Nor would a photo ID be any use at all because no one is required to submit a picture of themselves when they register. The whole point of a photo ID is to show that you look like whoever is on the ID.

As I already posted in the thread as many as 1 in 10 people in Texas do not have the required ID to vote and that is a lot of people. Nor do legislators in most states have any interest in their states paying massive amounts of money to make IDs free to all. It would go against their voting suppression tactics of making registration harder, eliminating or reducing early voting etc. Furthermore every citizen, even the homeless can vote. No ID would match their situation like living situation. Why the hell shouldn't they have a right to vote?

Maybe you should look at states that do not require Photo ID and ask yourself why if there is no requirement to show an ID, why is there practically no instances of voter fraud? Probably because if one is caught it is severe, you create a paper trail in doing voter fraud with plenty of evidence, and in order to pull if off one would have to know the district that the person you'd be impersonating and hope you get there before they do, because if it turns out they voted first then the poll workers would probably call the cops right then and there.

Citizenship -
I said it wrong the first time. You don't have to be a citizen to get a concealed carry but you do have to prove what your status is, thereby letting them (the gov) know whether you are or are not a citizen.

Neither a DL or a concealed carry permit is verifying your citizenship. It is a form of ID to help verify who you are. You (supposedly) had to prove citizenship when you registered to vote.
This is indirect - at least in WA state -
http://www.sos.wa.gov/_assets/elections/VRF_English_Fillable_WEB.pdf
On the voter registration form you have to sign saying you are a citizen. However you also have to either provide the last four of your SSN or give your WA DL number - and showing what your citizenship status is is part of the DL application process. Presumably they cross check the database to see if you are either actually a citizen or just in the country legally by some other means. In other words, you don't have to be a citizen to get a DL but you do have to show whether or not you are a citizen.

In other words, neither a DL or a concealed carry permit proves you are a citizen but the process for getting either one of those documents requires you to show what your status is. Therefore in one database or the other you have gone on record as either proving you are a citizen or proving you are not. Proof of citizenship is checked when getting on the voter registration list. At the polls it is simply a matter of proving you are that person.

Electioneer officials are not qualified to judge handwriting or signatures
I can't speak for you personally but YES, some of them ARE qualified to judge handwriting. At least here in WA state. We use an absentee ballot system and you sign the outer envelope and there is a place to put your phone number or email address so they can contact you if they think your signature does not match what they have on records. I have talked to the ladies in the courthouse processing the ballots who remove the outer outer envelope (the part folks would see in the mailbox - then verify the signature on the second envelope inside that - then remove the innermost envelope which has your sealed ballot in it (no name) and place it with the others for processing. The point being is they do check signatures against what they have on record. Back when we actually walked into the polls and voted in person they would check your signature on the sheet against what they had on file. I can not speak for how all states do it. I'll also say that back when we voted in person I assume that if there was a question of fraud on you signature it got bumped up to someone with more training on handwriting recognition. But they did check.

I agree it is not a perfect system. But if you agree that only US citizens should vote in US elections how do you verify they are US citizens without any form of identification? Just arguing "Well, it hasn't been much of a problem so far" is not really much of an argument. It isn't much of a problem because most states have some sort of verification system in place. If you go to a system where people are not required to have ID / prove who they are to either register to vote or in the actual voting then yes, I think cheating would become more common. And if a person has proof of who they are to register to vote then they have proof of who they are to vote.

I agree states don't want to hand out free ID cards. However if you are going to argue that
1.Voting is a constitutional right and there should be no fee required
2.States should require some form of ID to prove people are obeying the laws they put in place about who can vote -
then that leaves -
3. If they are going to require an ID they should provide it for free to folks who don't already have some acceptable form of ID like a DL.
Personally I think state issued ID should be free of charge. The majority of folks will pay for a DL. But for those who don't the state typically wants them to have ID for a variety of reasons so it benefits both the state and the person to make sure they have one.

So - back to the original points the article was making about how not accepting student ID but accepting conceal carry permits for voting is some sort of secret agenda to block some types of people and allow others .....

I think the biggest issue with student ID would be -
1. Many states require government issued ID and a student ID card is not government issued.
2. The reason many states require government issued ID (for voting, buying booze, opening a bank account etc.) is that it narrows down the number of types of documents the person reviewing the ID needs to be trained to recognize and the variety of ID numbers they are trying to keep in a database. Some places won't even accept out of state ID because there are just too many variations in DL / ID across the states. If you add to that every community college and vo-tech you've never even heard of it becomes virtually impossible to know if the ID is valid or in some cases if the institution issuing it even exists.

And that is at the polls. If you are talking about using student ID to register to vote then the problem also becomes that getting a student ID does not require you to prove what your status is in the country (citizen, resident alien, illegal, etc.) Getting a DL or concealed carry permit does. Thus even though you don't have to be a citizen to get a DL or CC you do have to go on record as to what your status is. They cross check the database and if you have not proved you are a citizen you don't get registered to vote. But they need that DL number or SSN or CC# to have a point to cross reference you in the database(s).

You already established that you do not need a picture ID to register to vote or even vote absentee. A SSN provides the option of not having to buy any ID, you just need to know your number (or ID number) and so long as you know your number then you don't have to pay a dime. Especially since registering to vote can be done by mail and you don't have to picture. You're incorrect about student ids being ineligible for banks. some banks are ok with accepting that and even make money off of it.

And yes, arguing the status quo for election law is fine unless someone can show there is a major flaw inherit in the system and their proposed solution is less problematic than the status quo. As it stands the penalty for a single instance of voter fraud is so severe and easy to catch without use of picture ID that more people win the lottery and are struck by lightning than even try election fraud. Most people who commit fraud (and we're talking 30-40 in the last 10 years) have been from workers of the elections or party officials.

So I keep asking that people prove that there is a problem to justify taking drastic steps to remedy and they can't do it. You included. Election fraud is a serious federal crime and the US government does keep records of who is charged acquitted and convicted. Would you like to see how few people actually try fraud every election in the entire country? Cause you're promoting we disenfranchise hundreds of thousands of people across the country to fix well... nothing. The fraud isn't happening.

[Roy Cura]

Omnileech

Roy Cura

God Emperor Baldur

Roy Cura

Divine_Malevolence

Keep the educated from voting.
Allow the gun nuts to.


Obviously a Republican move with pretty blatant motives. They know that the educated are smart enough not to vote for them, so they're trying to keep them from voting. You know damn well that the next election looks bleak when a state like Texas is trying to prevent itself from going blue.
And I love how they're proving their fear of voter related tomfoolery is accurate by engaging in it themselves.


With all the crap they're trying to pull, I'm curious. Is it going to be a reverse of Reagan's first election map? I'd assume that they have no chance at winning basically anything next time around, but just how bad are they going to get trounced?
How afraid of it are they?



And even requiring ID in the first place is really stupid to begin with. If it were necessary in any way shape or form, it would show quite clearly that something's wrong with the methods used to register. But instead of trying to tackle the problem that doesn't exist where it would have began, they're pulling out blatantly discriminatory, albeit not against race, laws. Gender is effected due to contradictory laws, but that's a byproduct of the fact that Republican lawmakers are basically braindead.
Dumbasses even admit it.

But if the educated are really educated, then they're smart enough to realize that they can still vote. Educated people would understand that a student ID from their college is not the only available ID. Instead they would seek some legitimate ID, or maybe just fill out an absentee ballot to my home state like I did when my current state wouldn't allow me to vote since I wasn't a resident of that state.

Seriously. If you are marginally diligent, it is easy to find a way to vote if you are eligible for voting. If you are not responsible enough to provide credentials to vote eligibility (which are readily available to you) then what business do you have voting?

And what if they can't? Do I need to state over and over again how this is election-rigging?

I understand that you think conservatives are trying to prevent minorities from voting.

I'm just having a hard time seeing how "minorities cannot vote" based on my own experience as a minority in a predominately white state in a predominately white college. There is no absolute blockage for someone to vote. If you take some time and look at state laws, you can find a way to vote.

Do you think minorities are too dumb to figure out the basis? Is that what it is? Do minorities need the quick and easy step to vote?

You're not even educated on the subject beyond your own personal experience? For one thing, voting laws apply to everyone, not just you. People who have to work 2 jobs to get by have the right to vote. The homeless have the right to vote. All these pushes to curtail early voting, making registering more difficult, and requiring people to jump through hoop after hoop results in disenfranchised voters. If suddenly people are required to have an ID then people who are legally entitled to vote yet do not have a valid ID cannot practice their constitutional right to vote thanks to that new law

And all in the name of combating a problem that nobody can demonstrate and prove that it is much of a problem at all!

get educated.
These laws are ridiculous. Look at the examples.

It shouldn't be difficult for any of age citizen to vote. Ever.

I sort of did get educated (perhaps not in the way you'd consider ideal). Rather than looking for all the things making it difficult for me to vote, I learned an easy way to cast my ballot.

[David2074]

Omnileech

David2074

Omnileech

David2074

Omnileech

David2074

"So to put it simply, this is a law that clearly attempts to make it easier for conservatives to vote while it makes it harder for the educated youth to vote. I would love to hear the defense for this nonsensical bullshit."

Well, okay, seems pretty obvious to me though.
The article states that the student IDs don't have the required information on them.
I'm also pretty sure you don't even have to prove you are a US citizen to get a student ID.

On the other hand I have my concealed carry permit from WA state.
To get it I had to provide government issued photo ID, a full set of fingerprints and submit to local and FBI background checks. And yes, it has my address on it.
I don't use it to vote with but between that and a student ID I can see why it would be more likely to qualify. It has nothing to do with whether or not I am conservative. It has to do with what was required to get the two IDs.

This is really mountain out of a mole hill. It may be one of the approved forms of ID for voting but I seriously doubt many folks are using it. Most folks with a carry permit also have a driver's license. Likewise, most students have or should have either a DL or a state issued ID. It's difficult to function in life without one since they are required for opening bank accounts, cashing checks, buying booze and so on.

You don't even have to prove you are a US citizen to get a concealed carry permit.

This isn't a mountain out of a mole hill. Why should you be required to spend any money practice a fundamental right. You aren't required to have an ID. You aren't required to keep your ID current. If someone wishes to live without driving, buying booze, opening bank accounts, cashing checks, etc. Then they CAN. Those aren't constitutional rights and voting is.

If you would look at various articles about which citizens would be inconvenienced by requiring to show Photo ID to vote, then you would see it is a fairly large number. And I have yet to see any proponent of mandating showing photo ID who can even prove that election fraud is an issue under the status quo! They often don't even try because reality doesn't back their beliefs or assertions.

Having worked as an election official for several years, I can see why it's not an issue and there are many failsafes already in place to catch fraud that work just fine to deter election fraud as it's a really obvious crime.

Actually, yes, you do have to be a citizen to get a concealed carry license - at least in WA state. It's late and I'm too tired to try to verify other states. The exception is you can also be a permanent resident with proper permanent resident card.

How to get your license: Concealed pistol license
Requirements

You must meet all of the following requirements to get a concealed pistol license (RCW 9.41.070):

Be 21 years of age or older at time of application.
Be a United States citizen or a permanent resident alien with permanent resident card (green card).
Have no pending trial, appeal, or sentencing on a charge that would prohibit you from having a license.
Have no outstanding warrants for any charge, from any court.
Have no court order or injunction against possessing a firearm.
Have never been adjudicated mentally defective or incompetent to manage your own affairs.
Have never been committed to a mental institution.
Have no felony convictions, or adjudications for a felony offense, in this state or elsewhere. “Felony” means any felony offense under the laws of Washington, or any federal or out-of-state offense comparable to a felony offense under the laws of Washington.
Within the past year, haven’t been an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana, depressants, stimulants, narcotics, or any other controlled substance.
Haven’t been convicted of 3 or more violations of Washington’s firearms laws within any 5-year period.
Haven’t been dishonorably discharged from the armed forces.
Aren’t currently subject to a court order restraining you from harassing, stalking, or threatening your child, an intimate partner, or the child of an intimate partner.
Have never renounced your United States citizenship.
Have no convictions for any of the following crimes committed by one family member against another:
Assault IV
Coercion
Stalking
Reckless Endangerment
Criminal Trespass in the first degree
Violation of the provisions of a protection order or no-contact order restraining the person or excluding the person from the residence

The thrust of this article was that allowing carry permits to be one of the forms of ID accepted at the polls is somehow supporting a particular agenda / viewpoint. I was simply pointing out a carry permit is actually a fairly decent form of ID because you have to prove who you are to get one. The one problem I have with it for other things (like voting) is that at least the ones in WA state do not have a photo on it. However they could at least compare my signature on the carry permit with the signature on my voter registration card.

I've heard your argument before but to me the only valid part might be to make an ID required for voting available at no cost. I don't agree that no ID at all is a good idea. Otherwise how do you prove it is really a particular eligible individual casting his vote and not some other person doing it in his stead? SOME people (a few) may choose to live without any kind of acceptable government issued ID. But they are an extremely small minority because most of us live in the real world and do drive and have bank accounts or want to cash paychecks and so on. For those few, sure, give them some sort of free government issued ID so they can vote without having to pay money.

I asserted that non-citizens can get a CCW. You confirmed it. Resident aliens are ineligible to vote, and such having a CCW is no guarantee that the holder is even a citizen. Same with that student ID, and yet you dislike the idea of student ids being an acceptable ID because there's no guarantee the holder is a citizen...

Electioneer officials are not qualified to judge handwriting or signatures and being basically volunteers, are in no position to disallow someone based on handwriting. Nor would a photo ID be any use at all because no one is required to submit a picture of themselves when they register. The whole point of a photo ID is to show that you look like whoever is on the ID.

As I already posted in the thread as many as 1 in 10 people in Texas do not have the required ID to vote and that is a lot of people. Nor do legislators in most states have any interest in their states paying massive amounts of money to make IDs free to all. It would go against their voting suppression tactics of making registration harder, eliminating or reducing early voting etc. Furthermore every citizen, even the homeless can vote. No ID would match their situation like living situation. Why the hell shouldn't they have a right to vote?

Maybe you should look at states that do not require Photo ID and ask yourself why if there is no requirement to show an ID, why is there practically no instances of voter fraud? Probably because if one is caught it is severe, you create a paper trail in doing voter fraud with plenty of evidence, and in order to pull if off one would have to know the district that the person you'd be impersonating and hope you get there before they do, because if it turns out they voted first then the poll workers would probably call the cops right then and there.

Citizenship -
I said it wrong the first time. You don't have to be a citizen to get a concealed carry but you do have to prove what your status is, thereby letting them (the gov) know whether you are or are not a citizen.

Neither a DL or a concealed carry permit is verifying your citizenship. It is a form of ID to help verify who you are. You (supposedly) had to prove citizenship when you registered to vote.
This is indirect - at least in WA state -
http://www.sos.wa.gov/_assets/elections/VRF_English_Fillable_WEB.pdf
On the voter registration form you have to sign saying you are a citizen. However you also have to either provide the last four of your SSN or give your WA DL number - and showing what your citizenship status is is part of the DL application process. Presumably they cross check the database to see if you are either actually a citizen or just in the country legally by some other means. In other words, you don't have to be a citizen to get a DL but you do have to show whether or not you are a citizen.

In other words, neither a DL or a concealed carry permit proves you are a citizen but the process for getting either one of those documents requires you to show what your status is. Therefore in one database or the other you have gone on record as either proving you are a citizen or proving you are not. Proof of citizenship is checked when getting on the voter registration list. At the polls it is simply a matter of proving you are that person.

Electioneer officials are not qualified to judge handwriting or signatures
I can't speak for you personally but YES, some of them ARE qualified to judge handwriting. At least here in WA state. We use an absentee ballot system and you sign the outer envelope and there is a place to put your phone number or email address so they can contact you if they think your signature does not match what they have on records. I have talked to the ladies in the courthouse processing the ballots who remove the outer outer envelope (the part folks would see in the mailbox - then verify the signature on the second envelope inside that - then remove the innermost envelope which has your sealed ballot in it (no name) and place it with the others for processing. The point being is they do check signatures against what they have on record. Back when we actually walked into the polls and voted in person they would check your signature on the sheet against what they had on file. I can not speak for how all states do it. I'll also say that back when we voted in person I assume that if there was a question of fraud on you signature it got bumped up to someone with more training on handwriting recognition. But they did check.

I agree it is not a perfect system. But if you agree that only US citizens should vote in US elections how do you verify they are US citizens without any form of identification? Just arguing "Well, it hasn't been much of a problem so far" is not really much of an argument. It isn't much of a problem because most states have some sort of verification system in place. If you go to a system where people are not required to have ID / prove who they are to either register to vote or in the actual voting then yes, I think cheating would become more common. And if a person has proof of who they are to register to vote then they have proof of who they are to vote.

I agree states don't want to hand out free ID cards. However if you are going to argue that
1.Voting is a constitutional right and there should be no fee required
2.States should require some form of ID to prove people are obeying the laws they put in place about who can vote -
then that leaves -
3. If they are going to require an ID they should provide it for free to folks who don't already have some acceptable form of ID like a DL.
Personally I think state issued ID should be free of charge. The majority of folks will pay for a DL. But for those who don't the state typically wants them to have ID for a variety of reasons so it benefits both the state and the person to make sure they have one.

So - back to the original points the article was making about how not accepting student ID but accepting conceal carry permits for voting is some sort of secret agenda to block some types of people and allow others .....

I think the biggest issue with student ID would be -
1. Many states require government issued ID and a student ID card is not government issued.
2. The reason many states require government issued ID (for voting, buying booze, opening a bank account etc.) is that it narrows down the number of types of documents the person reviewing the ID needs to be trained to recognize and the variety of ID numbers they are trying to keep in a database. Some places won't even accept out of state ID because there are just too many variations in DL / ID across the states. If you add to that every community college and vo-tech you've never even heard of it becomes virtually impossible to know if the ID is valid or in some cases if the institution issuing it even exists.

And that is at the polls. If you are talking about using student ID to register to vote then the problem also becomes that getting a student ID does not require you to prove what your status is in the country (citizen, resident alien, illegal, etc.) Getting a DL or concealed carry permit does. Thus even though you don't have to be a citizen to get a DL or CC you do have to go on record as to what your status is. They cross check the database and if you have not proved you are a citizen you don't get registered to vote. But they need that DL number or SSN or CC# to have a point to cross reference you in the database(s).

You already established that you do not need a picture ID to register to vote or even vote absentee. A SSN provides the option of not having to buy any ID, you just need to know your number (or ID number) and so long as you know your number then you don't have to pay a dime. Especially since registering to vote can be done by mail and you don't have to picture. You're incorrect about student ids being ineligible for banks. some banks are ok with accepting that and even make money off of it.

And yes, arguing the status quo for election law is fine unless someone can show there is a major flaw inherit in the system and their proposed solution is less problematic than the status quo. As it stands the penalty for a single instance of voter fraud is so severe and easy to catch without use of picture ID that more people win the lottery and are struck by lightning than even try election fraud. Most people who commit fraud (and we're talking 30-40 in the last 10 years) have been from workers of the elections or party officials.

So I keep asking that people prove that there is a problem to justify taking drastic steps to remedy and they can't do it. You included. Election fraud is a serious federal crime and the US government does keep records of who is charged acquitted and convicted. Would you like to see how few people actually try fraud every election in the entire country? Cause you're promoting we disenfranchise hundreds of thousands of people across the country to fix well... nothing. The fraud isn't happening.

"You're incorrect about student ids being ineligible for banks"
No, I'm not. And your link says nothing about being able to open a bank account with a student ID. Since your link was about BOA I've provided you with the photo ID requirements from BOA's web site. However, I think it's pretty universal because it is federal law. Or at least I've had bank employees tell me it was. Between personal use and handling two estates I've opened accounts with three banks in the past few years and every one of them required photo ID. The spoiler has the info from BOA. What's printed on a debit card (in this case student ID info) has no bearing on what is required to open a bank account.

https://secure.bankofamerica.com/mycommunications/public/appointments/frequentlyAskedQuestionsPopUpBBA.go
What forms of identification are acceptable when conducting business with the bank?
Generally, we require two forms of identification to verify your identity. You must bring at least one form of identification from the Primary ID List. The second form of identification can be from the Primary ID List or Secondary ID List.

Primary ID List (must have at least one from this list)

Drivers license with photo
U.S. non driver's license state-issued ID (with photo)
U.S. driver's permit (with photo)
U.S. Military ID Common Access Card (CAC) (with photo)
United States Armed Services ID (with photo)
United States state, or local government issued identification card (with photo)
U.S. passport (with photo)
Canadian Citizenship Certificate Card (with photo)
U.S. Alien Registration Receipt Card - Form I-551 (with photo)
U.S. Nonimmigrant Visa and Border Crossing Card - DSP-150 (with photo)
Foreign passport with or without passport Visa (with photo)
INS Employment Authorization Card - Form I-766 or I-688 (with photo)
Mexican Consular ID Card (with photo)
Dominican Republic Consular ID (with photo)
Colombian Consular ID (with photo)
Guatemalan Consular ID Card (with photo)
Bank of America branded debit card or credit card (with photo)
Bank of America debit card, ATM Card, or credit card (without photo)
Secondary ID List (may only use one of these in conjunction with a Primary ID)

Major credit card from another financial institution (including American Express, Visa, MasterCard, Novus/Discover) (with or without photo)
Major retail credit card from a nationally well-known department store or other nationally well-known retail company (such as Chevron, Macy's) (with or without photo)
Debit card (check card) with Visa® or MasterCard® logo from another financial institution (with or without a photo)
U.S. college/university ID - validated for current term or school year (with photo)
U.S. student ID card from a local high school validated for current school year (with/without photo)
U.S. issued employment/work ID card or badge (with/without photo)
Account Opening: Can be accepted at both offsite and banking center locations
U.S. driver's license (without photo)
U.S. Dept of State Diplomat driver's license (with photo)
U.S. Dept of State Diplomat ID (with photo)
Foreign driver's license (such as Brazil, France) (with photo)
Mexican driver's license (with photo)
Canadian driver's license (with photo)
Indian Tribal ID from a local reservation (with or without a photo)
Mexican Voter Registration Card (with photo)
AARP Card
Current lease agreement (must contain name and current address)
Current Property Tax Statement
Current utility bill (must contain name and current address)
Current vehicle registration
Department of Correction ID
Driver's permit (temporary or beginner's) from any state (without photo)
Health insurance card
Hong Kong Travel Document
Membership card (BJ's, COSTCO, Auto Club)
Sheriff's card
Social Security card
U. S. state or local government-issued license, permit or ID (examples: fishing, hunting, or gun permit)
Union card
United States Armed Services ID (without photo)

"Would you like to see how few people actually try fraud every election in the entire country?"
Yes, I would. Link Please.
I'm not saying you are wrong about that - I just find it interesting and I would like to see your source. If it is truly a non-issue statistically then I agree you have a point.
But I'd also like to see a link to data that requiring photo ID would "disenfranchise hundreds of thousands of people across the country". Virtually everyone I know who is old enough to vote has some form of government issued photo ID.
NOTE: I did find some info that tends to support your claim. It was speculative rather than factual and talked more about who doesn't have DL's than state issued ID but it made some valid points about poor and really old folks.

I agree that SSNs could be used as an optional form of identifying yourself. The issue with that is most folks do not want to give it out due to privacy / security / identify theft concerns. If they made SSNs the default way of identifying yourself at the polls I expect privacy groups would scream bloody murder. Even the military changed over to assigning service members a military ID number. Back in the day they just printed our SSN on our ID cards and quite often on misc. paperwork. At some point they figured out that was a security / privacy problem and changed it.

I don't disagree with everything you are saying but I do find the conversation interesting.
I'm personally okay with requiring government issued ID (with or without a photo) at the polls but I agree it should be easy to obtain and preferably free.