Unfair voting restrictions in Indiana. Wait! What?

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Lowe0

    Expert
    Rating - 100%
    2   0   0
    Feb 22, 2015
    797
    18
    Indianapolis
    I don't recall seeing any posts opposing those measures. This thread has been predominantly about voter ID.

    I'd like to see technology evolve to the point where people can vote from home, work or wherever they happen to be. It would require an internet connection and some means of verifying identity but I have to believe it would result in a far greater level of participation.

    Not gonna happen, because as we've already established, one party thinks it'll give the other party an edge, and preventing that is more important than looking out for the voters. (And if the positions were reversed, I'm not convinced that their opponents wouldn't say the exact same thing.)

    This seems like a good opportunity to give something and get something in return. We'll agree to voter ID laws; they can agree to expand early voting. There's a word for that sort of legislative agreement, though I haven't heard it in so long that I'm having trouble recalling it....
     

    phylodog

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    59   0   0
    Mar 7, 2008
    19,610
    113
    Arcadia
    Right, it been steered into a thread about voter identification, racism, and minorities. Despite the OP not mentioning a specific unfair restriction, and the subject making the statement listing elderly, poor, and minorities as the groups affected.
    But hey, just another day on INGO to complain about minorities.
    :dunno:

    Who complained about minorities? It has turned into a discussion about voter ID as that it the most loudly contested aspect of "restrictive" voting laws. Minorities were brought up as that has been the biggest excuse the Dem's have used as to why they don't like the voter ID laws.
     
    Last edited:

    phylodog

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    59   0   0
    Mar 7, 2008
    19,610
    113
    Arcadia
    Not gonna happen, because as we've already established, one party thinks it'll give the other party an edge, and preventing that is more important than looking out for the voters. (And if the positions were reversed, I'm not convinced that their opponents wouldn't say the exact same thing.)

    This seems like a good opportunity to give something and get something in return. We'll agree to voter ID laws; they can agree to expand early voting. There's a word for that sort of legislative agreement, though I haven't heard it in so long that I'm having trouble recalling it....

    It wouldn't have to exclude current voting options but I'm sure you're correct. No matter what is done, someone is going to cry foul.
     

    red_zr24x4

    UA#190
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Mar 14, 2009
    29,825
    113
    Walkerton
    . I've asking about later polling times (6pm is ridiculous), and polling precincts that equally distributed by population. I'm not sure why anyone would oppose such measures.

    I have not seen anyone state they disagree with these, I have seen people say they make arrangement ,absentee, early voting etc, to counteract these things
     

    Woobie

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Dec 19, 2014
    7,197
    63
    Losantville
    Well, I have voted (legally) in two counties (Randolph once, then several times in Delaware), and after this last move, I'll be voting in a third. We'll see how this year goes, but to date I have had zero difficulty. They did move the polling place four years ago, but that wasn't that big of a deal.

    I would be interested to see hard data on the difficulty of voting in IN. Preferably from a more trustworthy source than a senatorial campaign.

    But, honestly, not everything worth doing or having is going to be handed to you. Perhaps just a bit of effort, while not ideal, is not too onerous for such a solemn privilege. People stand in line for hours, risking getting blown up in Iraq for the chance to vote. They appreciate what it really means. Frankly, the right to decide our leadership in this country was neither easy nor cheap to obtain and maintain. So while easier, more accessible voting is a positive thing as long as fraud is kept at a minimum, it could be seen as petulant to complain about the difficulties of our elections.
     

    Woobie

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Dec 19, 2014
    7,197
    63
    Losantville
    The iraqis figured out how to prevent multiple votes.

    0307-IraqElec3.jpg


    Doesnt fix the ineligible voter, but it would prevent the bussing from station to station to station...

    That is a badge of honor there.

    Many places in the world do not have ready access to potable water. Having a clean well in the village is a huge deal, and the work of walking down to it so you can draw out your bucket full is a blessing, not a burden. Each of us in this discussion are within 30 feet or less of a faucet which will grant us a continuous stream of clean, drinkable water. And we don't give it a second thought, other than to complain when something leaks that we have to get it fixed.

    This is also true of voting. It seams the easier something gets, the more we complain about it.
     
    Top Bottom