Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Posts for: dtcracer
Page: <<prev 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ... 40 next>>
Aug 17, 2012 15:56:07   #
ted45 wrote:
Bunko.T wrote:
Well I put it to y'all. Let's get back to the Cinemas Schools & Temples massacres. What's the answer to that problem. It happens with monotonous regularity.


Actually it doesn't happen with "regularity". Since 1966 when Charles Whitman opened fire from the clock tower at the University of Texas at Austin, killing 16 people and wounding 31 there have been approximately 20 mass shootings throughout the World.

The worst was in Norway where Anders Behring Breivik killed 80 people at a summer camp and another 7 in Oslo on the same day. -2011

Martin Bryant, of Tasmania Australia managed to killed 20 people in a cafeteria and another 15 while making his getaway. -1996

Thomas Hamilton kills 16 kindergarten children and their teacher in elementary school in Dunblane, Scotland. -1996

An armed citizen could not have prevented any of those shootings. At best they might have limited the final death toll. A nut is a nut and you can't predict where or when they will snap.

America gets a bad rap for "gun" violence and you tend to think it only happens here but the truth is the problem is not unique to the US.

The interesting part of this is that since the first recorded mass murder in 1966 at the University of Texas the anti gun movement has continually gained steam. Well meaning people have disarmed themselves and as we move away from the “killer” mentality that we are labeled with, more and more people argue for giving up the guns. Before 1966 the vast majority of this country had weapons of one sort or another. Many of the Veterans coming home from the Great War were permitted to keep their rifles and take them home. I know a great many people who discuss this issue on both sides but I don’t know anyone, cops included, who has had firsthand experience with gun violence. It just isn’t as common as the press would have us believe. Yes, I know about the murder rates in the big cities. According to the FBI stats those murders are confined to relatively small areas and are decreasing.

Most Americans that have guns have them for sport use. Most would not use them in anger. I have killed and understand the trauma attached. I did it because of instinct and my USMC training. The guy was trying to kill me; it was war, so it seemed right. I would never do it voluntarily. It just isn’t worth the problems.

You guys from other countries can take your sanctimonious, holier than thou attitude and stuff it. We like to have the freedom to live our lives the way we want. If a nut bag pops up now and then; that's life.
quote=Bunko.T Well I put it to y'all. Let's get b... (show quote)


:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:
Go to
Aug 17, 2012 15:48:39   #
A news report today announced that the unemployment rates in New York, Connecticut and New Jersey is the highest since 1977. This is a contradiction to the claims of the left that the Obama administration is responsible for lowering unemployment rates is proven to be false propaganda. But, I guess that this must be G. W. Bush' fault, right?

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/08/16/us-newjersey-unemployment-idUSBRE87F15K20120816

Unemployment rates rose in 44 states, including 9 key voting states.

http://www.usnews.com/news/business/articles/2012/08/17/unemployment-rates-rose-in-44-us-states-in-july

Again, G.W. Bush' fault? We don't need four more years of this administration. Let's vote him out in November!
Go to
Aug 17, 2012 09:48:40   #
Bunko.T wrote:
Well I put it to y'all. Let's get back to the Cinemas Schools & Temples massacres. What's the answer to that problem. It happens with monotonous regularity.


Catch 'em all, pack 'em up and send them to a penal colony!
Go to
Aug 17, 2012 09:43:57   #
Very nice. I would frame them and hang them (the pictures, not the kids!!!) if I were you.
Go to
Aug 17, 2012 09:40:16   #
Gorgeous pictures! I really like the last one.
Go to
Aug 17, 2012 09:16:33   #
newbie147 wrote:
Sort of makes you wonder why the administration is so keen to get Julian Assage


Assange had to get his information from someone...
Go to
Aug 17, 2012 09:12:57   #
rocar7 wrote:
dtcracer wrote:
rocar7 wrote:
sarge69 wrote:

Asking our British readers, is this all true ?

Sarge



:shock:


Well, sort of. The facts have been twisted and presented in an emotional way. Take the Tony Martin case. He disturbed two burglars who ran off. As they were running away he shot them both in the back. Hardly self-defence, more like an attempted execution. That's why he was convicted. This is not the wild west, we do have laws in this country, and appropriate punishments for breaking those laws. Death is not an appropriate punishment for burglary.
quote=sarge69 br Asking our British readers, is ... (show quote)


I agree, there are appropriate laws, and death is not an appropriate punishment for burglary. However, according to the story posted by Sarge, the gentlemans neighbors had been burglarized, and some had been beat. So is a person supposed to just wait to get beat before deciding if he needs to protect himself? I disagree with this idea. When someone invades your home, they are not there to give you flowers, they are there intent on doing you harm, and a citizen should have the right to defend himself and his family, up to the use of deadly force. Laws cannot protect a citizen, they are just in place to punish those who choose to break said laws AFTER THE FACT. And what kind of country has laws that allow for tougher punishment to the victim than the criminal? Sounds like crime is the career one needs to get into in the UK, sounds profitable and like a government protected line of work!
quote=rocar7 quote=sarge69 br Asking our Britis... (show quote)


You can use appropriate force to defend yourself, which seldom extends to deadly force. If you live in a society that has laws and a justice system, then you should live within those laws. One person breaking those laws does not give you carte blanche to break them yourself. It seems to me that a lot of people on this forum are eager for the opportunity to kill someone, using that person's lawlessness as the excuse. Perhaps they should look into their own hearts to see if they can honestly say they are any different from those they deride.
quote=dtcracer quote=rocar7 quote=sarge69 br A... (show quote)


I disagree, I do not think anyone on here is anxious for an opportunity to use deadly force against another person. They are just stating if the need arose they would if they had to, and are standing up for their right to be able to is necessary. Speaking from experience as someone who has had to use deadly force I can assure you it is not something someone wants to do. It will always be on your mind, and you will find it hard to sleep from the nightmares. I was acting within the law at the time (as a police officer in the line of duty) and had to use deadly force against a suspect. If I had not I would not be writing this today, as it is the outcome of this incident has left me physically disabled, following a very lenghthy hospital stay. And yet if I had to defend my life and family I would do it again.
Go to
Aug 17, 2012 08:43:10   #
pjreed wrote:
Hal81 wrote:
Kit Lens wrote:
Just what this country needs - more firearms. We only have 300 million now.
I personally would make it illegal for anyone over seventy to own a gun at all, but that's just me.


How manty people over seventy do you know that rob and shoot other people? We nead ours to protect ourselves. If they ever pass the gun law the crooks will be over joyed they will know that we cant shoot back. Makes no sence at all. Get the illigal guns off the street if you want to do somthing.
quote=Kit Lens Just what this country needs - mor... (show quote)


It is true that countries that have gun control have fewer gun shot related deaths each year but stabbings, strangulation, bludgeoning and other ways to kill people are higher. (news media and gun control lobbyist do not tell you this) P O'd people kill people you do not need a gun.
quote=Hal81 quote=Kit Lens Just what this countr... (show quote)


Look at the UK, a lot less gun deaths, but bombings are way up compared to the US.
Go to
Aug 17, 2012 08:41:42   #
rocar7 wrote:
sarge69 wrote:

Asking our British readers, is this all true ?

Sarge



:shock:


Well, sort of. The facts have been twisted and presented in an emotional way. Take the Tony Martin case. He disturbed two burglars who ran off. As they were running away he shot them both in the back. Hardly self-defence, more like an attempted execution. That's why he was convicted. This is not the wild west, we do have laws in this country, and appropriate punishments for breaking those laws. Death is not an appropriate punishment for burglary.
quote=sarge69 br Asking our British readers, is ... (show quote)


I agree, there are appropriate laws, and death is not an appropriate punishment for burglary. However, according to the story posted by Sarge, the gentlemans neighbors had been burglarized, and some had been beat. So is a person supposed to just wait to get beat before deciding if he needs to protect himself? I disagree with this idea. When someone invades your home, they are not there to give you flowers, they are there intent on doing you harm, and a citizen should have the right to defend himself and his family, up to the use of deadly force. Laws cannot protect a citizen, they are just in place to punish those who choose to break said laws AFTER THE FACT. And what kind of country has laws that allow for tougher punishment to the victim than the criminal? Sounds like crime is the career one needs to get into in the UK, sounds profitable and like a government protected line of work!
Go to
Aug 17, 2012 08:30:52   #
Bunko.T wrote:
sarge69 wrote:
Think the government can't take your guns??? Read on. England is not the only country to do this and they are not the only country that has seen exponential increases in crime and criminal confidence!!! Just set back and do nothing and we will see this country fall into the same scenario as others. There is no way that the criminals will not have weapons!!!!! Whether they have guns, knives, or crowbars, it doesn't make any difference, you will not be able to defend yourselves against them.

Most law abiding citizens in this country who have guns are well
trained not only in how to use the gun, but when and when not to use it for self defense. It has been the law in many states that anyone wishing to have guns or hunt or target shoot must have a class before they can get a license for a handgun or a license to hunt. I took my class at Williams Gun Sight Co. in 1953. It was a volunteer class at that time, but when I hunted in Colorado I was required to give proof of a training course in gun handle. No one can tell me that the guns in this country are going to commit a crime. The crime is committed by a person and it is his/her decision to use what ever means of committing that crime.

Ask yourself where we would be today if it had not been for the armed citizen during the revolutionary war for our independence. They were not given weapons just to fight a war. Their weapons where their own!!!! It was those weapons and it was those determined men that gave us the freedom to have weapons and to live a life free of government interference. Please take some time to study what has
happened in England, Australia, South Africa and for that matter Germany during the reign of Hitler. Every time weapons were taken away their freedom and safety have suffered. Wake up American it can happen here!!!! Everyday there is some citizen or government official trying to eliminate your 2nd amendment rights!!!!!


"Every job is a self-portrait of the person who did it. Autograph your work with excellence. "Be who you are and say what you feel, because those that matter - don't mind... and those that mind - don't matter."

... You're sound asleep when you hear a thump outside your bedroom door. Half-awake, and nearly paralyzed with fear, you hear muffled whispers.

At least two people have broken into your house and are moving your way. With your heart pumping, you reach down beside your bed and pick up your shotgun.

You rack a shell into the chamber, then inch toward the door and open it. In the darkness, you make out two shadows. One holds something that looks like a crowbar.

When the intruder brandishes it as if to strike, you raise the shotgun and fire. The blast knocks both thugs to the floor. One writhes and screams while the second man crawls to the front door and lurches outside.

As you pick up the telephone to call police, you know you're in trouble.

In your country, most guns were outlawed years before, and the few that are privately owned are so stringently regulated as to make them useless. Yours was never registered.

Police arrive and inform you that the second burglar has died. They arrest you for First Degree Murder and Illegal Possession of a Firearm.

When you talk to your attorney, he tells you not to worry: authorities will probably plea the case down to manslaughter.

"What kind of sentence will I get?" you ask.

"Only ten-to-twelve years," he replies, as if that's nothing. "Behave yourself, and you'll be out in seven."

The next day, the shooting is the lead story in the local newspaper. Somehow, you're portrayed as an eccentric vigilante while the two men you shot are represented as choirboys. Their friends and relatives can't find an unkind word to say about them..

Buried deep down in the article, authorities acknowledge that both "victims" have been arrested numerous times. But the next day's headline says it all: "Lovable Rogue Son Didn't Deserve to Die."

The thieves have been transformed from career criminals into Robin Hood-type pranksters.. As the days wear on, the story takes wings. The national media picks it up, then the international media.

The surviving burglar has become a folk hero.

Your attorney says the thief is preparing to sue you, and he'll probably win.

The media publishes reports that your home has been burglarized several times in the past and that you've been critical of local police for their lack of effort in apprehending the suspects.

After the last break-in, you told your neighbor that you would be prepared next time.

The District Attorney uses this to allege that you were lying in wait for the burglars.

A few months later, you go to trial.

The charges haven't been reduced, as your lawyer had so confidently predicted.

When you take the stand, your anger at the injustice of it all works against you..

Prosecutors paint a picture of you as a mean, vengeful man.

It doesn't take long for the jury to convict you of all charges.

The judge sentences you to life in prison.

This case really happened.

On August 22, 1999, Tony Martin of Emneth, Norfolk , England , killed one burglar and wounded a second.

In April, 2000, he was convicted and is now serving a life term..

How did it become a crime to defend one's own life in the once great British Empire ?

It started with the Pistols Act of 1903.

This seemingly reasonable law forbade selling pistols to minors or felons and established that handgun sales were to be made only to those who had a license. The Firearms Act of 1920 expanded licensing to include not only handguns but all firearms except shotguns..

Later laws passed in 1953 and 1967 outlawed the carrying of any weapon by private citizens and mandated the registration of all shotguns.

Momentum for total handgun confiscation began in earnest after the Hungerford mass shooting in 1987. Michael Ryan, a mentally disturbed man with a Kalashnikov rifle, walked down the streets shooting everyone he saw.

When the smoke cleared, 17 people were dead.

The British public, already de-sensitized by eighty years of "gun control", demanded even tougher restrictions. (The seizure of all privately owned handguns was the objective even though Ryan used a rifle.)
Nine years later, at Dunblane , Scotland ,Thomas Hamilton used a semi-automatic weapon to murder 16 children and a teacher at a public school.

For many years, the media had portrayed all gun owners as mentally unstable, or worse, criminals. Now the press had a real kook with which to beat up law-abiding gun owners. Day after day, week after week, the media gave up all pretense of objectivity and demanded a total ban on all handguns. The Dunblane Inquiry, a few months later, sealed the fate of the few sidearms still owned by private citizens.

During the years in which the British government incrementally took away most gun rights, the notion that a citizen had the right to armed self-defense came to be seen as vigilantism. Authorities refused to grant gun licenses to people who were threatened, claiming that self-defense was no longer considered a reason to own a gun. Citizens who shot burglars or robbers or rapists were charged while the real criminals were released.

Indeed, after the Martin shooting, a police spokesman was quoted as saying, "We cannot have people take the law into their own hands."

All of Martin's neighbors had been robbed numerous times, and several elderly people were severely injured in beatings by young thugs who had no fear of the consequences. Martin himself, a collector of antiques, had seen most of his collection trashed or stolen by burglars.

When the Dunblane Inquiry ended, citizens who owned handguns were given three months to turn them over to local authorities.

Being good British subjects, most people obeyed the law. The few who didn't were visited by police and threatened with ten-year prison sentences if they didn't comply.

Police later bragged that they'd taken nearly 200,000 handguns from private citizens.

How did the authorities know who had handguns? The guns had been registered and licensed. Kind of like cars. Sound familiar?

WAKE UP AMERICA; THIS IS WHY OUR FOUNDING FATHERS PUT THE SECOND AMENDMENT IN OUR CONSTITUTION.

"...It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds.."
--Samuel Adams
=-======================
Asking our British readers, is this all true ?

Sarge



:shock:
Think the government can't take your guns??? Read... (show quote)


At the risk of upsetting the hornets nest Sarge, ole mate, In Australia we don't have crackpots snapping & going to the school or cinema to slaughter folks. Sure, We have our fair share of baddies & I had my rifle 'bought' from me by the Gov't. I get angry too, but would I shoot a bad arse? Well not to kill. Having a gun for protection is crazy. Here, if we used it for protection we'd be in the manure for discharging it. In fact if a burglar gets beaten up by me in my house, he'd probably sue me for assault. Just last night on the news, a cop got hung out to dry because he grabbed a girl who had just 'head butted' him, by the throat & took her down in a riotous situation. She should have been crucified but it's easier to do the lawman. Crazy but true. But I know where I'd rather live. Here without guns & a few crack pots.
I think US's problem needs a big decision to get control of the gun fiasco. It happens too regular. What if it was one of yours. Either way?
Look at the super nations. They have enough nukes to blow us all to "Kingdom Come". Why?? Who comes out smelling like roses? No one. We're all like burnt meat.
quote=sarge69 Think the government can't take you... (show quote)


Needing a gun for protection is crazy? Sounds to me like the Australian government has done a really good job of brain washing our Australian brothers! I own firearms, for protection and sport. I refuse to allow myself to be a victim. I will shoot to kill anyone who threatens the safety of my family. I am a trained police officer, and know how to properly handle a firearm. And as a police officer I am trained to shoot to stop the action, which means shoot to kill, this nonsense of "Why didn't he shoot him in the leg?" is stupid. My training teaches me that trying to shoot at a small target in a time of stress will result in missing the shot, and the potential of hitting an innocent bystander goes up expotentially. And allows the perp tp continue his assault of you, which may lead to your death. I am a strong believer that citizens have the God given right to protect themselves. The police cannot protect them, how can they know where and when a criminal is going to break into someones house and rob, rape and kill their wife and children? It is impossible. No one should have to allow themselves to be victims out of fear of being prosecuted for defending themselves. It is a sad day when criminals get free reign to terrorize citizens because the governments remove the right of the citizens to have personal protection. And then give the criminal more rights than the citizen. A person who is injured or killed by a victim of his crime should have no rights to sue the victim, and the victim should never be prosecuted. That criminal chose to put himself in the position to get hurt, the citizen did not. In my opinion, governments that pass gun laws like in Australia and the UK do it out of fear of being overthrown, because they are not acting in the best interest of their citizens. And you cannot convince me that there are no crackpots in Australia, there are crackpots in every country in the world. Mental illness is not a market cornered by the US.

God Bless the USA!
Go to
Aug 17, 2012 07:56:59   #
overthemoon wrote:
Hal81 wrote:
We all know why they dont want the ID law. Only one reason. They want all the illigal votes they can get.


It was said last night on almost all the news channels there is no voter fraud it is almost none existent. In pennsylevainia last year that had 4 cases for the whole state. Then what they did say was the new laws are going to prevent a lot of people's civil rights based on the voter rights amendment in the constitution. This info wasn't just posted on lib channels but some conservative as well. A lot of good republican believe people should have ID but need to give people at least one year to get it done not 3 mo. Before an election. In Penn there are 775,000 people who need to get this done close to a million. The DMV might not even be able to handle that kind of work load. My question is if this is a requirement why does it need to be done in 3 mo.

As I see it mitt and Paul have pissed off women minorities gay elderly and the poor.
quote=Hal81 We all know why they dont want the ID... (show quote)


That is funny, I watch the news every night and I didn't see any stories on voter frad.
How have Mitt and Paul pissed off these minority groups you mentioned? And what has that got to do with voter fraud and requiring ID for voters? Or are you just trying to stir the pot with some some crap?
Go to
Aug 17, 2012 07:52:41   #
Hunter Lou 1947 wrote:
dtcracer wrote:
overthemoon wrote:
A News21 analysis of 2,068 alleged election-fraud cases since 2000 shows that while fraud has occurred, the rate is infinitesimal, and in-person voter impersonation on Election Day, which prompted 37 state legislatures to enact or consider tough voter ID laws, is virtually non-existent.




In an exhaustive public records search, News21 reporters sent thousands of requests to elections officers in all 50 states, asking for every case of fraudulent activity, including registration fraud, absentee ballot fraud, vote buying, false election counts, campaign fraud, casting an ineligible vote, voting twice, voter impersonation fraud and intimidation.


Analysis of the resulting comprehensive News21 election fraud database turned up 10 cases of voter impersonation. With 146 million registered voters in the United States during that time, those 10 cases represent one out of about every 15 million prospective voters.

In Minnesota, there have been 10 total cases of reported fraud and no cases of voter impersonation reported since 2000.

“Voter fraud at the polls is an insignificant aspect of American elections,” said elections expert David Schultz, professor of public policy at Hamline University School of Business in St. Paul.


Courtesy of Hamline University
David Schultz
“There is absolutely no evidence that [voter impersonation fraud] has affected the outcome of any election in the United States, at least any recent election in the United States,” Schultz said.

What we found
The News21 analysis of its election fraud database shows:

In-person voter-impersonation fraud is rare. The database shows 207 cases of other types of fraud for every case of voter impersonation.
 “The fraud that matters is the fraud that is organized. That's why voter impersonation is practically non-existent because it is difficult to do and it is difficult to pull people into conspiracies to do it,” said Lorraine Minnite, professor of public policy and administration at Rutgers University.

There is more fraud in absentee ballots and voter registration than any other categories. The analysis shows 491 cases of absentee ballot fraud and 400 cases of registration fraud. A required photo ID at the polls would not have prevented these cases.
 “The one issue I think is potentially important, though more or less ignored, is the overuse of absentee balloting, which provides far more opportunity for fraud and intimidation than on-site voter fraud,” said Daniel Lowenstein, a UCLA School of Law professor.

Of reported election-fraud allegations in which a resolution could be determined, 46 percent resulted in acquittals, dropped charges or decisions not to bring charges.
Minnite says prosecutions are rare. “You have to be able to show that people knew what they were doing and they knew it was wrong and they did it anyway,” she said. “It may be in the end they [prosecutors] can't really show that the people who have cast technically illegal ballots did it on purpose.”

Felons or noncitizens sometimes register to vote or cast votes because they are confused about their eligibility. The database shows 74 cases of felons voting and 56 cases of noncitizens voting.
Voters make a lot of mistakes, from accidentally voting twice to voting in the wrong precinct.
Election officials make a lot mistakes, from clerical errors — giving voters ballots when they’ve already voted — to election workers confused about voters’ eligibility requirements.
“I don't think there is a mature democracy that has as bad of an elections system as we do,” said Richard Hasen, a professor of political science and election law expert at the University of California, Irvine. “We have thousands of electoral jurisdictions, we have non-professionals running our elections, we have partisans running our elections, we have lack of uniformity.”

Voter-impersonation fraud has attracted intense attention in recent years as conservatives and Republicans argue that strict voter ID laws are needed to prevent widespread fraud.
A News21 analysis of 2,068 alleged election-fraud ... (show quote)


I would say that infinitesimal rate of voter fraud is enough, after all, doesn't every vote count? That meager 10 votes may be all it takes in a close election to tip the vote fraudulently. I say we need to ID voters to prevent voter fraud. Its called being pro-active to stop a problem before it gets out of hand.
quote=overthemoon A News21 analysis of 2,068 alle... (show quote)


I agree but, let's do it in a way that people are given fair notice so that they can prepare to get what is needed and that every state has the same rules and not that one has a different set of rules. It should be completelythe same one set of rules for every state. That is why we are The United States of America.
quote=dtcracer quote=overthemoon A News21 analys... (show quote)


That is what makes our country so great, the idea that each state has the right to make and enforce their own laws, as long as it doesnt't conflict with Federal law. (Even though the current trend is that they are conflicting Federal laws, look at the legalized Marijuana laws being passed, in direct conflict if Federal law). Although I agree there are some laws that should be the same in every state, and when it comes to national elections the rules should be the same, there should be a Federal guideline.
Go to
Aug 16, 2012 23:54:54   #
:XD:


Go to
Aug 16, 2012 20:25:30   #
Hunter Lou 1947 wrote:
dtcracer wrote:
Hunter Lou 1947 wrote:
dtcracer wrote:
Twardlow wrote:
SteveR...

I have Never had produce photo ID for a Dr. Visit or for notorization...NEVER!

The people involved are too poor to drive....do you think they need a passport?

T H E R E. I S. N O. V O T E R. F R A U D ! ! !

This is a poll tax, punishing poor, black voters, who generally vote Democratic.

It is a partisan Republican tactic that abuses Democracy, and

I T. S T I N K S.


Shame on you...Tom


Then you must not ever go to the doctor, or have anything notarized. It is law that a notary public see your picture ID before she/he can notarize for you. They have to be able to swear in court if the need arises that you are who you claim you are, and that you proved you are who you claim you are at the time the document was notarized. And as far as it being proposed just to repress the poor, black community, I call bullsh#$ on that. I am so tired of hearing liberals pulling the race card every time they do not agree with something, but cannot say why. It is a proposal to prevent non US citizens (illegals) from voting, because they have voted. They do not have the right to take part in our political system, they are not citizens.
quote=Twardlow SteveR... br br I have Never had ... (show quote)


You are just one of those self made people who gives a rats ass about other people who may want a break once in awhile. People who are going to school who are on a very tight budget, the elderly who are going to have to give up some of their prescriptions to pay for a photo I.D. so they can vote. You may not know this but it is happening all over this country. No you just don't give a rats ass because you are probably the well to do who doesn't care about the less fortunate. These people who I'm describing are the real true Americans oif this country and deserve the right to vote too.
quote=dtcracer quote=Twardlow SteveR... br br I... (show quote)


I am NOT a self made person, I am living on a very tight budget of less than $17,000 a year, and raising 4 children. I have never had money in my life. You need to keep your accusations and opinions to yourself if you cannot be civil to other people. It is people like you who makes me proud to be a conservative. How dare you suggest that I am not a true American? I am probably more a a Patriot than you are! I happen to believe in the sovereinty and security of the country that I fought for. You are one of the bleeding heart dumb@$$es who would allow our country to be tread on because an illegals non-existant rights are more important than the rights of the American citizen. Every time people like you allow an illegal to have rights they do not have, it makes a mockery out of our Constitution and makes the rights of the American people less sacred.

As far as people not being able to afford a picture ID, I am in full support of a government funded ID system to assit these people in getting an ID, or a free ID system. I am not in support of anyone who is here illegally having any rights, or the ability to get an ID. They are here in violation of Federal law, and as such should be prosected!
quote=Hunter Lou 1947 quote=dtcracer quote=Twar... (show quote)


I agree that those who are here illegally should not get an I.D to vote. I'm not against voter I.D. either but to push it upon the voters at such a close time before an election is in my opinion playing with dishonesty in an election. These people should have at least two full years to get them. Why is is all of a sudden aproblem when there is not documented cases of fraud. I guess 4 people in P.A. committed voter fraud out of the millions voting, come on lets get real. We can't suppress the vote because of some big time politician needs some votes to win an election.
quote=dtcracer quote=Hunter Lou 1947 quote=dtcr... (show quote)


If you had not been so aggressive and accusatorial, and had stated this to begin with, you would find we agree. I do not think it is fair to require people who have never had to have an ID in the past to obtain one on short notice prior to an election. I believe the law should be passed now, and be in effect for the next Presidential election.
Go to
Aug 16, 2012 20:17:28   #
overthemoon wrote:
A News21 analysis of 2,068 alleged election-fraud cases since 2000 shows that while fraud has occurred, the rate is infinitesimal, and in-person voter impersonation on Election Day, which prompted 37 state legislatures to enact or consider tough voter ID laws, is virtually non-existent.

In an exhaustive public records search, News21 reporters sent thousands of requests to elections officers in all 50 states, asking for every case of fraudulent activity, including registration fraud, absentee ballot fraud, vote buying, false election counts, campaign fraud, casting an ineligible vote, voting twice, voter impersonation fraud and intimidation.


Analysis of the resulting comprehensive News21 election fraud database turned up 10 cases of voter impersonation. With 146 million registered voters in the United States during that time, those 10 cases represent one out of about every 15 million prospective voters.

In Minnesota, there have been 10 total cases of reported fraud and no cases of voter impersonation reported since 2000.

“Voter fraud at the polls is an insignificant aspect of American elections,” said elections expert David Schultz, professor of public policy at Hamline University School of Business in St. Paul.


Courtesy of Hamline University
David Schultz
“There is absolutely no evidence that [voter impersonation fraud] has affected the outcome of any election in the United States, at least any recent election in the United States,” Schultz said.

What we found
The News21 analysis of its election fraud database shows:

In-person voter-impersonation fraud is rare. The database shows 207 cases of other types of fraud for every case of voter impersonation.
 “The fraud that matters is the fraud that is organized. That's why voter impersonation is practically non-existent because it is difficult to do and it is difficult to pull people into conspiracies to do it,” said Lorraine Minnite, professor of public policy and administration at Rutgers University.

There is more fraud in absentee ballots and voter registration than any other categories. The analysis shows 491 cases of absentee ballot fraud and 400 cases of registration fraud. A required photo ID at the polls would not have prevented these cases.
 “The one issue I think is potentially important, though more or less ignored, is the overuse of absentee balloting, which provides far more opportunity for fraud and intimidation than on-site voter fraud,” said Daniel Lowenstein, a UCLA School of Law professor.

Of reported election-fraud allegations in which a resolution could be determined, 46 percent resulted in acquittals, dropped charges or decisions not to bring charges.
Minnite says prosecutions are rare. “You have to be able to show that people knew what they were doing and they knew it was wrong and they did it anyway,” she said. “It may be in the end they [prosecutors] can't really show that the people who have cast technically illegal ballots did it on purpose.”

Felons or noncitizens sometimes register to vote or cast votes because they are confused about their eligibility. The database shows 74 cases of felons voting and 56 cases of noncitizens voting.
Voters make a lot of mistakes, from accidentally voting twice to voting in the wrong precinct.
Election officials make a lot mistakes, from clerical errors — giving voters ballots when they’ve already voted — to election workers confused about voters’ eligibility requirements.
“I don't think there is a mature democracy that has as bad of an elections system as we do,” said Richard Hasen, a professor of political science and election law expert at the University of California, Irvine. “We have thousands of electoral jurisdictions, we have non-professionals running our elections, we have partisans running our elections, we have lack of uniformity.”

Voter-impersonation fraud has attracted intense attention in recent years as conservatives and Republicans argue that strict voter ID laws are needed to prevent widespread fraud.
A News21 analysis of 2,068 alleged election-fraud ... (show quote)


I would say that infinitesimal rate of voter fraud is enough, after all, doesn't every vote count? That meager 10 votes may be all it takes in a close election to tip the vote fraudulently. I say we need to ID voters to prevent voter fraud. Its called being pro-active to stop a problem before it gets out of hand.
Go to
Page: <<prev 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ... 40 next>>
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.