I don't buy that 25% of the population is unable to obtain a DL or state ID; modify that to 'can't or won't' and it seems more right to me.

Both of my grandfathers also fought in WWII (one in each theater) and comparing having to show a driver's license when you get pulled over for speeding to having to show your papers so you don't get ovened for being a Jew is somewhat of a stretch (and a stretch that I am quite sure neither of them would make themselves, were they still alive).

However, if the reality of the AZ law is in fact that cops just randomly roust brown people to see if they are illegal, then yes, I have a problem with that. My understanding of the opposition to that law was that the left was making a similar sort of "slippery slope" argument as you seem to be making here, although I could certainly be wrong.

That is a good point, but where else exactly could it lead beyond that? Gas chambers instead of voting booths for registered Democrats/non-evangelicals/pro-choicers (I fit two out of those three criteria btw)? Is there even a large population of petty criminals that still rock the vote?

Driving is a choice. Voting is a right.

He isnt talking about having ID when driving. Clearly.

So then what exactly are we talking about here? Spell it out for me, since I'm obviously not operating on your level.

Having "papers" to perform basic rights of citizens, namely voting, is a key part of the slippery slope argument.

thinly-veiled "i couldn't find any links to support this point of view" hand-waving..

But yes, I'm pretty certain that both parties have, in the past, tried to stop the counting of absentee ballots. I remember Dems making a big stink about Repubs not wanting to count military ballots from D counties in FL '00.

And here is the nuance, bro: while you're right that there is a segment of the population that won't get ID as opposed to can't, what about those who believe that they shouldn't have to? I happen to be one of those. Well in an ordinary universe those who feel that way might have been able to band together and elect a politician who agreed with them to oppose those who share your view.

Except, if your side has its way that won't happen, because you've managed to deny those people their VOTE! Your ID requirement just went from being logistical to political.

how about "questioning" for anyone of Hispanic or Arab descent? Is it so hard to see that happening in, say, Maricopia county, AZ?

To what other basic human rights are you concerned this policy could extend?

I guess I can grant that there probably aren't too many illegal aliens that are eager to go vote (or even can, since you need a SSN), so it's obviously not an issue of ensuring only citizens vote.

I can't believe I am posting this much about this issue; compared to the ID when voting issue, I think it's orders of magnitude more ridiculous that people think it's reasonable that 25% of the population "can't"* get a DL or state ID.

So you don't have government ID, or you just feel you shouldn't have to? Are you American, and do you drive? How old are you, and how old were you by the time this opnion formed? I find this fascinating (bro).

Being the politics forum, I know you are all inherently picturing me as an evil right winger, but I'm really not . . . My opinion has no evil political machinations lying underneath of it. I just don't think it's unreasonable that people should carry official ID, other obviously do; that's all.

I have a problem with that, and it's quite obviously wrong. If the law is being misapplied in that way then it needs to stop. That some people feel the slippery slope argument is reason enough to not have laws like the AZ immigration law seems to me to be a perfectly reasonable stance to take; I just don't happen to share that opinion.

I feel that if a person chooses to not have government ID in the USA that is their right and privilege and they should experience no real ill effects of living that way. I do personally carry ID, but only when I'm driving. If I'm just out on the street I don't.

Really, why?

What about if every baby born in the US was tattooed with a bar code identification. That would be even better from a logistical point of view, don't you think?

Sorry for the characterization, by the way. I'm sure you're not evil, just misguided


Except history shows that laws like that are almost always misapplied. That's why we speak out against them now, because if we let them take root then it becomes too late.

Either that or I was just too lazy.

Googling shows Dems, in the past 12 months or so, on first page, falling on the side of tending to disenfranchise military personnel in Las Vegas, Hawaii and Illinois.

I guess I just feel like I really don't have anything to hide/fear from the government, and there are plenty of instances where I need to show ID/confirm my identity. I don't find it to be particularly intrusive; I have already conceded I'd likely feel differently if I came from a different background.

[QUOTE]What about if every baby born in the US was tattooed with a bar code identification. That would be even better from a logistical point of view, don't you think?{/QUOTE]

Now who's taking things to illogical extremes? If you can't see the difference between carrying a card in your wallet with your address and photo with having the goverment turn you into Agent 47 then I don't know what to say. Obviously we see different degrees of slipperiness to the slope.

I'm sure I'll get more liberal as I get older -- that's how it usually works, right?

So the solution is to let illegal aliens roam freely throughout the country? How about developing a decent pathway for amnesty, which would restrict the need for laws like this in the first place?

Hey I'm all in favor of that, but unfortunately that idea is being blocked by the same people trying to stifle everyone's right to vote. They want to build a giant wall first.

In general many people think the government needs to justify its intrusions into the lives of its citizens. Yeah, you can get an ID. But why are we making people get an ID? To combat the utterly non-existent scourge of voter fraud?

Like, nobody is fooled by that. If you tell me I need to jump through hoops to prevent a HORRIBLE THING that is pretty clearly not happening(and you don't even think is happening, and can't explain how it would happen, etc.), I'm going to figure out that you're up to something.

How many of you guys who are all "whats the big deal" have ever voted? Like, what anti-fraud measures do you think are currently at play?

What loophole is requiring photo ID closing?

Fly --

Not sure if your post was directed at me or not (there was a lot of royal "you" usage), but I'll briefly respond. As I've said before, my concern is less with voter fraud (since that isn't happening to the degree the right seems to be claiming) but more with the left painting getting an ID as an unreasonable, impossible request for the lower class. I have had conversations to this effect with a friend of a friend running for state office and I find the sort of classism that assumes poor people shouldn't be expected to do X for themselves because it's hard to be particularly odious.

That there is a significant subset of the no ID population that is ideologically opposed to it was not something I had ever considered, and even though I don't agree with the reasoning, obviously it's anyone's right to choose to forgo government issued ID.

Who has possibly painted getting an ID as an unreasonable or impossible request?

You're telling me it's easy, but you're not telling me why I should try to do it in the first place.

BTW in case you missed it, in at least one state not only did the GOP administration pass an ID requirement for voting, but they also closed DMV offices in minority neighborhoods as well, not to mention also wording the legislation in such a way that student ID's wouldn't be accepted.

See guys, if we just let the government implant these RFID chips in all citizens, these problems are all solved.

Finally someone understands what I"m saying!

I understand, but I think you are overlooking a fundamental concept that many people feel very strongly about, so strongly that is considered a question of constitutionality. Being a US citizen does not require one to carry a piece of paper stating such.

It's not a question of how easy or practical it is to get ID. I am a US citizen. I don't ****ing need ID for my fundamental rights.

Waiting for someone to answer fly's question. How does having an ID even prevent voter fraud? Please lay out one specific scenario.

How about this as another reasonable solution to the problem? If you don't bring ID, an asterix goes next to your vote, which either side can use to investigate possible voter fraud after the fact. There is absolutely zero reason republicans should have a problem with that, barring the obvious that the reason they're doing this has nothing to do with voter fraud.

As I've said before, this is very, very bad, and completely indefensible.

I don't have a problem with this . . . Most student IDs are just laminated pieces of paper with little to no personal information on it (although I guess maybe that's why most of you like it in lieu of government IDs).

I never said anyone ITT did, I said I've had conversations with others regarding this specific topic who framed it that way; I know you know I didn't say that though.

For the millionth time, I come from the school of why not wrt this issue, as I never considered what the problem was before this thread. Obviously you guys have beaten it into me now, and I understand your side (although no one ITT has specifically said that they themselves don't have an ID, interestingly enough).

When I lived in VT in the early 90's, my driver's license - like everybody else in the state - did not have my picture on it. Somehow, the state managed to function just fine.

Not sure how relevant that is to the discussion, but I thought it was kinda cool.

Is anyone ITT even currently arguing that it does?

Works for me.

I'm sure you're right.

If only you had lived in New Hampshire, I could have quoted your post and snarkily replied "Live Free or Die". "Freedom and Unity" doesn't have quite the same ring to it given the situation . . .