The Republican Party Today

#127
#127
hog88 said:
Shall not be infringed
Click to expand...
Rational and reasonable restrictions are not infringements.
Been ruled on multiple times.
You can keep saying it but you know it changes nothing.
Age restrictions on the purchase of a gun are absolutely constitutional.

You trapped yourself - there are additional dangers in the third dimension.........give it time.
 
#128
#128
clarksvol00 said:
It is right there. You're basically saying that if someone is receiving government assistance, they should not be allowed to vote.
Click to expand...

I did. What level and kind of assistance could be discussed. Someone who lost their job and has been on unemployment for a few weeks shouldn’t be disenfranchised. But someone that’s been on welfare for years but is capable of working yeah maybe shouldn’t hold a franchise.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#130
#130
hog88 said:
No, not at all. Quit trying to read things that aren’t there.
Click to expand...
A follow-up: today @VolinWayne stated that he took government covid money (which was approved under trump) for his business, wound up not needing it, and felt guilty because of it. I asked him if would donate the funds to a charitable cause and he responded that he spent it on his acreage in GA. Should he be prohibited from voting because of his utilization of government largesse?
 
#132
#132
hog88 said:
I did. What level and kind of assistance could be discussed. Someone who lost their job and has been on unemployment for a few weeks shouldn’t be disenfranchised. But someone that’s been on welfare for years but is capable of working yeah maybe shouldn’t hold a franchise.
Click to expand...
See my follow-up.
 
#134
#134
clarksvol00 said:
A follow-up: today @VolinWayne stated that he took government covid money (which was approved under trump) for his business, wound up not needing it, and felt guilty because of it. I asked him if would donate the funds to a charitable cause and he responded that he spent it on his acreage in GA. Should he be prohibited from voting because of his utilization of government largesse?
Click to expand...

Depending on which program the money came from he may be subject to prosecution.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VFFL@THE BEACH
#137
#137
hog88 said:
Depending on which program the money came from he may be subject to prosecution.
Click to expand...

You have to steal a buttload for the feds to care. Even if he's not subject to prosecution, the point still stands. Whether you're taking foodstuffs and welfare, or sucking up governmental corporate assistance without needing it; you're still on relying on gov't largesse. Do we take away Wayne's right to vote, too?
 
#142
#142
clarksvol00 said:
You have to steal a buttload for the feds to care. Even if he's not subject to prosecution, the point still stands. Whether you're taking foodstuffs and welfare, or sucking up governmental corporate assistance without needing it; you're still on relying on gov't largesse. Do we take away Wayne's right to vote, too?
Click to expand...

Exception for those that are disabled. They can't help that.
 
#144
#144
clarksvol00 said:
You have to steal a buttload for the feds to care. Even if he's not subject to prosecution, the point still stands. Whether you're taking foodstuffs and welfare, or sucking up governmental corporate assistance without needing it; you're still on relying on gov't largesse. Do we take away Wayne's right to vote, too?
Click to expand...

Maybe so
 
#146
#146
luthervol said:
I have no problem with that. Seems rational and reasonable.
Click to expand...

Right. I also think that in person voting is the way to go, but some could register to vote remotely via a paper mail in ballot if they register their thumbprints before hand. There is no way to cheat that way. The thumbprints can be scanned and verified before the vote is counted.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top