Jump to content

House Votes To Overturn Obama Rule Restricting Gun Sales To The Severely Mentally Ill

Politics   (4,332 Views 72 Comments)
6 Followers; 98,803 Visitors; 15,702 Posts
If you find this topic helpful leave a comment.
advertisement

You are reading page 2 of House Votes To Overturn Obama Rule Restricting Gun Sales To The Severely Mentally Ill. If you want to start from the beginning Go to First Page.

I would be fine with a Court that is deciding if someone is mentally ill enough to require a decision of incompetence to make their own decisions also weighing in on competence to own firearms. That would be due process and a hurdle high enough that the govt couldn't capriciously deny firearms to somebody randomly.

And to clarify your last sentence, a CITIZEN shouldn't be deprived the right to vote without due process. Requiring an ID to vote isn't a high hurdle, nor is it a due process violation. Since we linked voting and 2A rights here as fundamental Constitutional rights, you don't support allowing someone to walk into any gun store and buy a gun without showing ID, do you?

~faith,

Timothy

Which ID? What is wrong with due process before deciding a WWII veteran's VA picture ID is not a valid government issued ID?

There are reasons other than not being a citizen that deprive some people of their voting rights when laws are too strict:

Sutter, 61, doesn't drive and her only photo ID is from when she was a college student in 1978.

Her Social Security card is under the name Tia Sutter.

Her New York-state birth certificate is under the name Christine Sutter.

She has been told that she cannot get a state issued ID because her names don't match. "I thought I knew my legal name," she said. "I'm not sure anymore."

To change her name on her SS card, she was told she would need a court order, which would cost $400 and would take months.

"My roots and my future are all in Pennsylvania," Sutter said, choking up with emotion. "It's hurtful to me that this is now a question of 'papers please.'

If your papers aren't in order, you can't vote."

Speaking Freely: Voter ID Trial Day 4: Real People, Real Stories

Here was a 92 woman who had been voting and then was denied her right to vote. She had to do a lot to get due process.

I think there should be due p;process before denying a citizen the right to vote. I'm glad the state of Texas used some common sense.

My mother and grandmother were born in Texas. Neither had a birth cdfrtificate. My grandmother voted in the first election after women were allowed to vote.

My mother voted from age 21. When she went to get a p;passport she needed proof of where she was born. They accepted records of the church where she was baptized.

My husband was delivered by his grandmother at home in 1927. The state of Illinois accepted his school records, the page from the family Bible recording his birth, his drivers license and his draft registration, when he registered to vote.

... A frail 92-year-old woman has earned her right to vote Tuesday after struggling with new voter identification laws sweeping across the U.S.Ruby Barber, a senior citizen in the small town of Bellmead, Texas, had been unable to vote because she could not find her nearly century-old birth certificate that she'd need to obtain a voter ID under a new state law.

'I'm sure (my birth) was never reported because I was born in a farmhouse with a coal oil lamp,” Barber, 92, told the Waco (Texas) Tribune. 'Didn't have a doctor, just a neighbor woman come in and (delivered) me.”

This was rectified Tuesday when the state was able to verify her citizenship by finding her birthday in a U.S. census taken in the 1940s, Barber's son Jimmy Denton told the Tribune. Barber also showed her Social Security card, two utility bills and her Medicare card.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/texas-officials-won-92-year-old-texas-woman-voter-id-article-1.1799344

Why New Photo ID Laws Mean Some Won't Vote

January 28, 2012

Why New Photo ID Laws Mean Some Won't Vote : NPR

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We give guns back to people when they have known issues with domestic violence or PTSD. That was the case with the fellow who shot up the baggage claim area.

There is no political will in this country to in any way limit access to guns in the way there is political will to limit access to health care.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There is no political will in this country to in any way limit access to guns in the way there is political will to limit access to health care.

Or access to voting ... :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have o doubt that there are citizens in the 90's who have no birth certificates....but let's get real. Those people are few and far between and will become even fewer as they reach the end of what I hope were good lives.

Most and by a large margin, of voting age people NOW, will have to have one.......you can't anything without one. ID is required for all kinds of far less important things than voting.....so why not voting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have o doubt that there are citizens in the 90's who have no birth certificates....but let's get real. Those people are few and far between and will become even fewer as they reach the end of what I hope were good lives.

Most and by a large margin, of voting age people NOW, will have to have one.......you can't anything without one. ID is required for all kinds of far less important things than voting.....so why not voting.

Because we MUST NOT take away the Constitutional right to vote of those " few and far between" America citizens.

 

If the state of Texas can use common sense when challenged why not require that same common sense due process before depriving a citizen of his or her voting right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Because we MUST NOT take away the Constitutional right to vote of those " few and far between" America citizens.

 

If the state of Texas can use common sense when challenged why not require that same common sense due process before depriving a citizen of his or her voting right?

I am not advocating taking their right to vote away, but if there are only a few voter fraud cases (as the left wants us to believe) and we are to ignore that, then why not ignore this also.

My original point was that at what point will we realized that not having a birth certificate is no longer true for anybody and start actually demanding proper ID to vote?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
advertisement

Yes -- and I might be more willing to take seriously demands for laws requiring voter ID if they weren't always put forward by Republicans in the absence of any actual evidence of significant in-person voter fraud, and if the proposals didn't usually seem so carefully designed to exclude minorities, the elderly, and other groups perceived as being likely Democratic voters ...

Court: North Carolina Voter ID Law Targeted Black Voters | Election 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I am not advocating taking their right to vote away, but if there are only a few voter fraud cases (as the left wants us to believe) and we are to ignore that, then why not ignore this also.

My original point was that at what point will we realized that not having a birth certificate is no longer true for anybody and start actually demanding proper ID to vote?

Because what you claim is no longer true IS still true.

Maybe if and when each and every citizen has a birth certificate and naturalization papers.

What about the college student who was denied voting because her married name was on her driver's license and was different from her birth certificate? Should he have to pay $300 to rectify the discrepancy? (Poll tax?)

Edited by herring_RN

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Because what you claim is no longer true IS still true.

Maybe if and when each and every citizen has a birth certificate and naturalization papers.

What about the college student who was denied voting because her married name was on her driver's license and was different from her birth certificate? Should he have to pay $300 to rectify the discrepancy? (Poll tax?)

Are you saying the student failed to correct her new name on the voting records when she married and then expected the poll worker to overlook the fact that her name on her DL was different from what was on the voter registration record?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Are you saying the student failed to correct her new name on the voting records when she married and then expected the poll worker to overlook the fact that her name on her DL was different from what was on the voter registration record?

that wasn't the example given

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Are you saying the student failed to correct her new name on the voting records when she married and then expected the poll worker to overlook the fact that her name on her DL was different from what was on the voter registration record?

Yeah, herring, would you mind clarifying? I don't quite understand either. If toomuchbaloney is right, please give us a link or clear up this for us. (Also, I'm sure you meant to type "she" and not "he").

What about the college student who was denied voting because her married name was on her driver's license and was different from her birth certificate? Should he have to pay $300 to rectify the discrepancy? (Poll tax?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
×