LogFAQs > #922571676

The Admiral posted...

I don't have an issue with this, but I would apply exactly the same logic about how this is a "minimal" burden to the requirement for voter IDs.

If the extra fee and time here are acceptable for someone to exercise their 2nd amendment rights, an even smaller fee and inconvenience should be fine to exercise voting rights and ensure no chance of voter fraud can occur.

Study after study has shown that voter fraud is not an issue. Criminals getting guns and killing people have been an issue though.

To vote costs you no money, and you can register to vote from home, and even mail in early voting and absentee ballots from your home. To get a gun you already have to leave your home and pay fees, wait for checks, etc. Not to mention the fact that the people that craft the Voter ID laws, and shorten early voting times, and shut down polling places, and limit absentee voting have already admitted to only making these laws to cut down on minority voters who are more likely to vote against them. On the one hand you have people trying to save lives(however misguided that may be), and on the other hand you have people trying to suppress minorities so they can stay in power. It's not really comparable.

This law is okay, but I'm not sure how many of these cases of excons buying guns legally actually exist. They show one reference, but is it that common? Or is this an overreaction to one isolated incident?
---

Holy crap! How have I not set a signature for the message boards yet?