No ID required. License to steal.

[Bigbrog]

2 minutes ago, ThreePointTakedown said:

That 45 sued for being a bigot and a racist in the 70's. 

You consistently refused to call people going through the LEGAL asylum process as legal or non'illegal' so that you didn't say it doesn't mean you didn't infer it. You are still ignorant and I still feel sorry for you. But you can go ahead and work to convince yourself that you aren't. Which I imagine is the whole point of this exercise. 

Where were your answers from the first post that you didn't answer? 

Can someone help this person define 'travel ban' and what that might entail for people trying to immigrate through those means. Malicious or stupid? 

Nope just you, your ideas, and your rationalizations. 

I don't give a s#$% if you think I am ignorant or if you feel sorry for me. 

A travel ban during a pandemic, like every other freaking country did, is proof that Trump is racist...got it!  LOL

Again, you keep inferring things in what I said.  Stop claiming I said things that I never said, or claiming how I truly feel about things other than what I write.  You'll never be able to take what people say for exactly what they say without interjecting some sort of weird boogeyman in your mind.  Continuing to call people racist and bigots is cowardly and weak and says a lot more about you then it does the person who you are claiming to be a bigot or racist.  No to mention, it waters down the things and people that are actually racist or bigoted, and it is pathetic and sad that you do that. 

Must be hard for you to get through life with thinking everyone you disagree with has some evil malicious ulterior motive including them being bigot's and racists...but you be you...  

[JimmyBT]

6 minutes ago, Bigbrog said:

I don't give a s#$% if you think I am ignorant or if you feel sorry for me. 

A travel ban during a pandemic, like every other freaking country did, is proof that Trump is racist...got it!  LOL

Again, you keep inferring things in what I said.  Stop claiming I said things that I never said, or claiming how I truly feel about things other than what I write.  You'll never be able to take what people say for exactly what they say without interjecting some sort of weird boogeyman in your mind.  Continuing to call people racist and bigots is cowardly and weak and says a lot more about you then it does the person who you are claiming to be a bigot or racist.  No to mention, it waters down the things and people that are actually racist or bigoted, and it is pathetic and sad that you do that. 

Must be hard for you to get through life with thinking everyone you disagree with has some evil malicious ulterior motive including them being bigot's and racists...but you be you...  

that one sure loves to play the race/bigot card even though he/she/it is one of the most prejudiced people on here. 

[ThreePointTakedown]

42 minutes ago, Bigbrog said:

I don't give a s#$% if you think I am ignorant or if you feel sorry for me. 

A travel ban during a pandemic, like every other freaking country did, is proof that Trump is racist...got it!  LOL

Again, you keep inferring things in what I said.  Stop claiming I said things that I never said, or claiming how I truly feel about things other than what I write.  You'll never be able to take what people say for exactly what they say without interjecting some sort of weird boogeyman in your mind.  Continuing to call people racist and bigots is cowardly and weak and says a lot more about you then it does the person who you are claiming to be a bigot or racist.  No to mention, it waters down the things and people that are actually racist or bigoted, and it is pathetic and sad that you do that. 

Must be hard for you to get through life with thinking everyone you disagree with has some evil malicious ulterior motive including them being bigot's and racists...but you be you...  

You just keep teeing me up to your ignorance or laziness. Was the pandemic raging in 2017? Nope. That's when 45 tried to ban travel from several countries. I'm sorry you need to believe 45 is not racist. But you're wrong. You'll need to come to grips with that on your own. 

Speaking of inferring, did I ever say I didn't want America to be 'better' like you claim? Nope. I'm inferring your bias because its clear as day. The nature of the bias is either your laziness or intent to inflict harm. Now it seems as if that ire has been turned to the one pointing it out, me. Which is a natural, emotional reaction. But you can work to train it out of you if you want to. Seems as though you're happier calling people a derogatory term. Hope its worth it. 

[Scouts Honor]

23 hours ago, WrestlingRasta said:

Oh you’re talking about where I wrote about the conversation I had yesterday morning at work.  
 

So what you’re saying to me is that even though you were not at all involved in those different conversations throughout those fours days, you’re resting on the fact that you know those people’s perceptions and where they are coming from in their views.  Got it. 
 

That is a nice and safe way to think when you don’t want your own ideas challenged.  I’ll give you that.  

when i am in mixed company, i don't bring up politics. im polite.

when someone else does... i change the topic. 

there are so many people who (like some of the posters on this forum) who can't maintain their dignity.

[Scouts Honor]

4 hours ago, ThreePointTakedown said:

Seriously. This is what you're so afraid of. 

Someone was given a form? Someone got something delivered in the mail that wasn't intended for them? 

Did they fill them out? Were they mailed/delivered back? Were they entered into the system? Did the system flag them for not qualifying to vote? 

Y'all love making mountains out of mole hills when it suits you. 

Show me the finish line? Show me where this has actually happened instead of just a hint, of whisper, of a rumor. 

You have nothing. 

And the NY Post of all places. Is not reputable at all. Siting no sources of the info and quoting(not for the story specifically but to keep you clutching your pearls) CHIP 'em effin' ROY of all people. Could you scrape any more wood from the bottom of that barrel. 

Please for the love of Roland, get better sources. We talk all about 'vetting immigrants'. Vet your sources of information for reliability. Not just that they say the thing that you believe, just louder. 

Its embarrassing. 

wondering where all the extra ballots appear from? here it is

someone got mailed something not intended for them.. it was a ballot..

guess who has the market cornered on harvesting ballots

 

"IT"S NOT HAPPENING!"

rinse repeat the cycle 

[WrestlingRasta]

2 minutes ago, Scouts Honor said:

when i am in mixed company, i don't bring up politics. im polite. There are people in the world, not like you.  Apparently, these are some of those people.

when someone else does... i change the topic.  Same as above

there are so many people who (like some of the posters on this forum) who can't maintain their dignity. There are also so many people who can.

 

[Scouts Honor]

22 hours ago, fishbane said:

Literally half that stuff can be done without a photo ID. Probably over half.  

The partisan split on the topic of voter ID almost entirely boils down to the demographics of those who would need to get a photo ID in order to comply with the law and don't otherwise have one.  This is essentially those without a driver's license which are disproportionately young people and/or residents in urban areas.  These individuals have historically voted for Democrats at a higher rate than Republican candidates.  If the reverse were true, Republicans might still be worried about election security but they wouldn't be pushing for laws requiring that photo ID be presented.

pick one then, i see them all.

[Scouts Honor]

3 hours ago, red viking said:

While stricter immigration policy enforcement is something that's generally needed, now is NOT the time to start deporting undocumented workers. 

Unemployment is still extremely low so any deportation will merely cause more inflation. Wait for unemployment to go up before doing this, or even spending crazy money on a wall. 

yesterday was the time to start.

[Scouts Honor]

11 minutes ago, WrestlingRasta said:

 

i dont want to enrage the leftists who can't.

there are enough mass shootings 

[fishbane]

8 hours ago, Scouts Honor said:

pick one then, i see them all.

Not sure what you mean.  Do you mean pick something from the list of things the graphic purports ID is required for that it really isn't?

An easy one would be getting married.  Several states allow for common law marriage.  You don't have to show anything to anyone for your marriage to be recognized by the state in a state that allows common law marriage.  The two people that wish to be married simply start saying they are married and they are.  Some states with common law marriage specify that the individuals need to cohabitate for a minimum period or be of a certain age, but there is still nothing which must be filed for the marriage to be legal and certainly no ID presented.

Another one is buying alcohol.  I have purchased alcohol many many times without presenting a valid ID.  If someone suggested we should require ID for voting in the same way it's required to buy alcohol, that doesn't sound like it would be very secure at all.  Underage people buy alcohol all the time in this country,

I think almost everything in the list can be done without a valid ID.  Which do you think really cannot in any of the United States?

[headshuck]

If an establishment gets caught selling underage patrons alcohol they could lose their license.

The temptation is always there to cheat for more sales.

[WrestlingRasta]

6 hours ago, fishbane said:

Not sure what you mean.  Do you mean pick something from the list of things the graphic purports ID is required for that it really isn't?

An easy one would be getting married.  Several states allow for common law marriage.  You don't have to show anything to anyone for your marriage to be recognized by the state in a state that allows common law marriage.  The two people that wish to be married simply start saying they are married and they are.  Some states with common law marriage specify that the individuals need to cohabitate for a minimum period or be of a certain age, but there is still nothing which must be filed for the marriage to be legal and certainly no ID presented.

Another one is buying alcohol.  I have purchased alcohol many many times without presenting a valid ID.  If someone suggested we should require ID for voting in the same way it's required to buy alcohol, that doesn't sound like it would be very secure at all.  Underage people buy alcohol all the time in this country,

I think almost everything in the list can be done without a valid ID.  Which do you think really cannot in any of the United States?

Clearly talking about what are matters of law, not whether or not people break those laws.  Obviously selling alcohol to minors is against the law, so we'll squash that one. 

As for common law marriage, identification is actually an aspect if you want your common law marriage recognized legally.  Here are some things required for a common law marriage, and receiving the legal status of such, much or all of which requires being able to provide identification....

 

Common Law Marriage FAQ - FindLaw

[headshuck]

State reps won’t vote for this because they’d be out of compliance on day 1.

[Scouts Honor]

https://www.wkar.org/wkar-news/2024-05-01/michigan-senate-passes-election-recount-bill

[Scouts Honor]

6 hours ago, fishbane said:

Not sure what you mean.  Do you mean pick something from the list of things the graphic purports ID is required for that it really isn't?

An easy one would be getting married.  Several states allow for common law marriage.  You don't have to show anything to anyone for your marriage to be recognized by the state in a state that allows common law marriage.  The two people that wish to be married simply start saying they are married and they are.  Some states with common law marriage specify that the individuals need to cohabitate for a minimum period or be of a certain age, but there is still nothing which must be filed for the marriage to be legal and certainly no ID presented.

Another one is buying alcohol.  I have purchased alcohol many many times without presenting a valid ID.  If someone suggested we should require ID for voting in the same way it's required to buy alcohol, that doesn't sound like it would be very secure at all.  Underage people buy alcohol all the time in this country,

I think almost everything in the list can be done without a valid ID.  Which do you think really cannot in any of the United States?

ok i grant you some states about marriage

i had to show my ID to get a marriage license 

[jross]

8 hours ago, fishbane said:

Not sure what you mean.  Do you mean pick something from the list of things the graphic purports ID is required for that it really isn't?

An easy one would be getting married.  Several states allow for common law marriage.  You don't have to show anything to anyone for your marriage to be recognized by the state in a state that allows common law marriage.  The two people that wish to be married simply start saying they are married and they are.  Some states with common law marriage specify that the individuals need to cohabitate for a minimum period or be of a certain age, but there is still nothing which must be filed for the marriage to be legal and certainly no ID presented.

Another one is buying alcohol.  I have purchased alcohol many many times without presenting a valid ID.  If someone suggested we should require ID for voting in the same way it's required to buy alcohol, that doesn't sound like it would be very secure at all.  Underage people buy alcohol all the time in this country,

I think almost everything in the list can be done without a valid ID.  Which do you think really cannot in any of the United States?

Underaged drinking decreased when IDs became required.

https://www.cdc.gov/alcohol/underage-drinking/minimum-legal-drinking-age.html

I don't recall if its the laws or policy but another change occurred ~20 years back where everyone under 40 had to be carded, all people always had to be carded, cashier couldn't ring up alcohol unless card was scanned, etc.  The secret shopper actions occurred, issuing fines and suspending liquor licenses, etc.  

Requiring IDs has been effective for alcohol.  Enforcement of IDs is more effective.

[ThreePointTakedown]

17 hours ago, Scouts Honor said:

wondering where all the extra ballots appear from? here it is

someone got mailed something not intended for them.. it was a ballot..

guess who has the market cornered on harvesting ballots

 

"IT"S NOT HAPPENING!"

rinse repeat the cycle 

I know you're just asking questions and that is laudable. But why are you not interested in finding the answers or offering possibilities. All the possibilities, not just the ones that make you feel vindicated?

https://www.heritage.org/voterfraud do you trust these numbers or have any reason to believe they are not within a reasonable range? 

I mentioned these stats before. If this is a problem, which I don't believe it really is, why put so much effort into a crime with very little upside to those who commit it and very little pay off for getting away with it?

Also, when voting is made harder to do, who is effected more/most, who's voices get shut out of the process, those who are rich and have means or those who are barely able to vote as is? I say barely able, but I mean barely willing because they've been marginalized and/or ignored for generations(pretty much everyone but white men). Now you might be thinking, 'here comes the victim mentality'. But seriously, some in this country, who vote almost exclusively for liberal candidates, have only been able to vote for the length of one lifetime. I mean African-Americans have been threatened, killed, red-lined, poll taxed, and gerrymandered(all legally at the time, mind you) out of their right to vote. Not to mention all other poor people in this country that find it hard to vote as is. Now you might say, 'if it means so much they'll find a way'. Which if you are thinking that, comes from a place of privilege for not having to weigh the cost of voting vs keeping your job or a hundred other things that might be at stake if you 'choose' to stand in a long line(sometimes for hours in some lower income areas)  to vote. 

The party that has lost the popular vote in 7 of the last 8 federal elections has been beating the drum to restrict voting because 1500ish times someone has voted when they shouldn't have. 1500 in the last 40 years. 

That's looking for a solution to a problem that doesn't exist. Unless they're trying to apply that same solution to a different problem. 

[fishbane]

3 hours ago, WrestlingRasta said:

Clearly talking about what are matters of law, not whether or not people break those laws.  Obviously selling alcohol to minors is against the law, so we'll squash that one. 

As for common law marriage, identification is actually an aspect if you want your common law marriage recognized legally.  Here are some things required for a common law marriage, and receiving the legal status of such, much or all of which requires being able to provide identification....

 

Common Law Marriage FAQ - FindLaw

I never said anything about selling alcohol to minors.  I never bought alcohol from a store as a minor.  It often happens as a middle age man.  Walk into to a bar order alcohol.  Pay for alcohol. Consume alcohol.  Leave.  All very similar to how Willie described his voting experience in PA for the last presidential election, but even more anonymous.  He had to identify himself by giving his name which was matched to a list.  I have been served alcohol legally without giving my name or ID.

I don't know what you're going on about with the common law marriage thing.  You just say you're married no identification that's how it works - not everywhere but in some states.  You can then file your taxes as married.  No identification is provided when filing taxes.  The only place that link you provided said anything about providing identification was when filing a name change, which was not on the original graphic and is also something that is not required when you get married. I suspect many places that ask for ID when filing for a marriage it isn't even really a requirement.  The law probably is similar has an age limit so the ID is just proof that both parties are old enough to enter into marriage.  A couple senior citizens go in there with the forms filled out and they breeze through.  Someone brings a birth certificate instead of a drivers license and they are good to go.  Some places might require photo ID too.

[WrestlingRasta]

Valid 

[fishbane]

1 hour ago, jross said:

Underaged drinking decreased when IDs became required.

https://www.cdc.gov/alcohol/underage-drinking/minimum-legal-drinking-age.html

I don't recall if its the laws or policy but another change occurred ~20 years back where everyone under 40 had to be carded, all people always had to be carded, cashier couldn't ring up alcohol unless card was scanned, etc.  The secret shopper actions occurred, issuing fines and suspending liquor licenses, etc.  

Requiring IDs has been effective for alcohol.  Enforcement of IDs is more effective.

I am talking about today, but that link said nothing about requiring ID and I said nothing about underage drinking.  I'm not talking about 20 years ago.  I don't know any state that requires an alcohol sellers to check an ID before selling alcohol.  Penalties I am aware of are for actually selling alcohol to minors.  I think some States remove liability for the establishment if the patron provided a valid ID.  This is also why some store will scan all IDs this way they have a record.  I personally hate buying alcohol at these places because I don't want my information stored in their system and potentially in another data breach.  I try to give ID as infrequently as possible.  

Secret shoppers are over 21, but may appear to be under 21.  There is usually not a legal penalty for selling to one without checking the ID because you haven't broken the law.  The shopper will tell the manager though and the employee that made the sale may be disciplined.

[WrestlingRasta]

7 minutes ago, fishbane said:

I am talking about today, but that link said nothing about requiring ID and I said nothing about underage drinking.  I'm not talking about 20 years ago.  I don't know any state that requires an alcohol sellers to check an ID before selling alcohol.  Penalties I am aware of are for actually selling alcohol to minors.  I think some States remove liability for the establishment if the patron provided a valid ID.  This is also why some store will scan all IDs this way they have a record.  I personally hate buying alcohol at these places because I don't want my information stored in their system and potentially in another data breach.  I try to give ID as infrequently as possible.  

Secret shoppers are over 21, but may appear to be under 21.  There is usually not a legal penalty for selling to one without checking the ID because you haven't broken the law.  The shopper will tell the manager though and the employee that made the sale may be disciplined.

In Florida it is required to check if the person appears under 40, and there are secret shoppers and if you get busted and the person is 35….you’re busted.  It is also that within certain feet of schools (7-11’s for example) the bar code on the ID has to be scanned. 
 

Not a debate point, just info sake. 

[ionel]

1 hour ago, jross said:

Requiring IDs has been effective for alcohol.  Enforcement of IDs is more effective.

But we don't want effective we want more illegal voters!

[fishbane]

4 hours ago, headshuck said:

If an establishment gets caught selling underage patrons alcohol they could lose their license.

The temptation is always there to cheat for more sales.

If someone casts a vote that is ineligible to vote the could also face punishment.  Literally the entire list in your graphic is like this.

Getting a prescription.  My dentist gave me a prescription a couple weeks ago.  I don't think I have ever shown him a photo ID.  Possibly years ago when I first went to see him.  When I went to have it filled I did so at a pharmacy I had never filled a prescription before and they didn't ask for ID.  I had to give them my date of birth and they were somewhat concerned that my doctor had not put that on the prescription.  They may have called him to verify between when I dropped it off and picked it up a couple days later.  I did not show ID when picking it up either.  Maybe in some states or for some medication it is required.  I am sure many prescriptions are written every day for minors that don't have ID or elderly or sick individuals that simply cannot travel to the pharmacy themselves to fill it.  They all get their medication without showing ID.

Boarding a plane. Travelers under 18 years old do not have to show ID to the TSA.  That's a lot of people.  I personally have travelled by plane as an adult thrice post 9/11 without showing a photo ID.  The first time I was 18 or 19 and didn't have a drivers license yet.  I didn't have a state ID.  This would have been within a year or two of 9/11.  Not sure what I showed if anything to get my boarding pass.  The other two times were in the past 10-12 years.  Both times I had forgotten my ID or had temporarily lost it.  I was given a pat down and extended screening, but allowed to travel.  I may have showed something with my name on it like a credit card, but didn't have anything with a photo.  I am sure if you lose your drivers license you will be allowed to board a plane in 2024.

Applying for a Job.  I don't think this is a thing either.  I had several jobs before I had a drivers license.  I think my sister even had a job before she was old enough to get a drivers license.  The only "government issued" ID we would have had then was a student ID from the public high school we attended.  I don't know if I provided that which would be an acceptable document for form I9, but a photo ID is not necessary.  Proof of ID for ID is worded like this on I9 "ID card issued by federal, state or local government agencies or entities, provided it contains a photograph _or_ information such as name, date of birth, gender, height, eye color, and address".  So it doesn't need to have a photograph on it at all and some of the listed options don't typically have a photograph, like a voter registration card.  Show a voter card and your social security card and your Gucci for I9.

Cashing a check.  I am pretty sure there is no law on this.  You might struggle to find someone willing to do it, but I believe it is theoretically possible.  

... it's the whole entire list.

[fishbane]

31 minutes ago, WrestlingRasta said:

In Florida it is required to check if the person appears under 40, and there are secret shoppers and if you get busted and the person is 35….you’re busted.  It is also that within certain feet of schools (7-11’s for example) the bar code on the ID has to be scanned. 
 

Not a debate point, just info sake. 

It's possible.  I just wonder what that law looks like that they are charged with breaking.  Any law crafted so subjectively -  "appears under 40" would have problems.  It's legal to sell alcohol to a 35 year old that appears to be 40, but it's illegal to sell alcohol to a 35 year old that appears to be 35.  It sounds like a bad law, but those do exist.

The law in Florida is beside the point anyway.  Even if a a few states actually have a law requiring establishments that sell alcohol to check or scan a valid government issued picture ID for every patron that doesn't really make the graphic any less misleading.  There are a few states that require a photo ID to vote. You could put voting in the left hand column with purchasing alcohol or you could put purchasing alcohol in the right hand column with voting.  

[Bigbrog]

Seriously...how many people would NOT be able to vote if an ID was required???  I'm looking for real numbers...not the mythical made up emotional talking points...but real numbers with real proof.  And since some of you are so hell bent that voter fraud isn't a problem because it happens at a small percentage...can you hold that same thought process for the impact of implementing voter ID??

p.s. If you are going to spew any nonsense about "privilege" or "white male" b.s. don't bother.

Edited Thursday at 04:54 PM by Bigbrog