Nope, it's yours as I've explained above. YOU are the one who stated it was "tedious" and since voting is a "right" it shouldn't be "tedious". So if your "logic" holds or is applied to other rights...? So yes, it is appropriate to question you on the "right" to bear arms. If there is tedium put in place by the gov't doesn't that infringe on our "right" according to your "logic"?Originally posted by: Hacp
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Wrong, it was your "logic". Your "rights" and "tedious" - I simply applied the same "reasoning" to another "right" we have which is gun ownership.Originally posted by: Hacp
Why not? I was just using CAD's "Logic".Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Hacp? you tried to compare the right to bear arms to the right to have nuclear weapons, that was just plain sad.
Yes, I agree with you 100%.But if there is the possibility of that being a legitimate argument they can allow people without IDs to cast a vote and then put their vote aside with all the other questionable votes and after then go back and count these votes latter. It is the same thing many places do with people who have moved and not re-registered before the election.
It allows everyone to vote, but puts safe guards in place to prevent fraud.
BTW from most studies the amount of fraud is very low. Either there is little fraud, or the people doing it are damn good to have not been caught or even suspected of it.
Again, read from above. You tried to compare the process of getting a gun to the process of voting. Two different things. That is where your bad logic comes in.