| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Message |
Author |
 Re: Racist Gillum appealing to "white guilt" (V) |
Dave Dorsey |
| UncleJD wrote: | | Interesting thought. The right to bear arms is in the 2nd amendment. Where is the right to vote? |
Are you serious? Lol
Eligibility was originally a matter for the states (that's what's happening here, btw).
There were four subsequent amendments that guaranteed voting rights could not be restricted on the basis of race, gender, age, or failure to pay a tax -- the 15th, 19th, 24th, and 26th.
States retain the right to restrict the right to vote on other grounds, which is what Florida had done previously and chose to change here.
Voting is also at times a First Amendment issue. Yesterday, a three-judge federal court panel tossed Maryland's most recent redistricting, and ordered them to redraw before 2020, on the grounds that the state had violated the free speech rights of the Republican plaintiffs in MD-6 by diluting their voices with a politically-motivated redistricting.
Last edited by Dave Dorsey on 11/8/18 1:23 pm; edited 1 time in total |
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 13654
11/8/18 1:22 pm
|
|
|
|  |
 |
|
|
| Re: Racist Gillum appealing to "white guilt" (V) |
Nature Boy Florida |
| UncleJD wrote: | | Nature Boy Florida wrote: |
If the right to vote is no longer limited from felons - I wonder how long the right to bear arms is limited? |
Interesting thought. The right to bear arms is in the 2nd amendment. Where is the right to vote? |
It's mentioned a lot as a right to.vote in several amendments.
But rights are not unlimited. Florida had a pathway to regain the vote...albeit cumbersome.
I voted no on all the amendments. Everyone of them was the legislatures job- we didn't need amendments for any of them.
_________________
Whether you like it or not, learn to love it, because its the best thing going today! |
Acts-pert Poster
Posts: 16619
11/8/18 1:23 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Dave Dorsey |
| I don't think we should get off track here with a discussion about firearm ownership, but that is a right guaranteed in the Constitution and if an ex-felon has fully served his or her sentence, I don't see any reason why they should be further prohibited from owning or possessing a firearm. It's a very similar issue in my opinion. |
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 13654
11/8/18 1:25 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Nature Boy Florida |
| Dave Dorsey wrote: | | I don't think we should get off track here with a discussion about firearm ownership, but that is a right guaranteed in the Constitution and if an ex-felon has fully served his or her sentence, I don't see any reason why they should be further prohibited from owning or possessing a firearm. It's a very similar issue in my opinion. |
It's similar to me, too - that's why I brought it up.
I have no problem with putting restrictions on both of them.
I guess we will disagree on this.
_________________
Whether you like it or not, learn to love it, because its the best thing going today! |
Acts-pert Poster
Posts: 16619
11/8/18 1:45 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Eddie Robbins |
There is no Constitutional right to vote for President. Each state decides how they wish to send their electors to present their vote. In Bush v Gore, the Supreme Court cited: “The individual citizen has no federal constitutional right to vote for electors for the President of the United States,†citing McPherson v. Blacker which states that a state’s ability to decide how to appoint electors is plenary. Indeed, many states did not hold elections to determine electors in our nation’s early decades, and Colorado did not hold a presidential election as recently as 1876.
So, there is no right to vote for President. It is a privilege. BTW, in our system today, the electors could go against their state’s popular vote and nothing could be done about it. In fact, electors were courted to go against Trump in 2016. |
Acts-pert Poster
Posts: 16509
11/8/18 2:58 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| Re: Racist Gillum appealing to "white guilt" (V) |
UncleJD |
| Dave Dorsey wrote: | | UncleJD wrote: | | Interesting thought. The right to bear arms is in the 2nd amendment. Where is the right to vote? |
Are you serious? Lol
Eligibility was originally a matter for the states (that's what's happening here, btw).
There were four subsequent amendments that guaranteed voting rights could not be restricted on the basis of race, gender, age, or failure to pay a tax -- the 15th, 19th, 24th, and 26th.
States retain the right to restrict the right to vote on other grounds, which is what Florida had done previously and chose to change here.
Voting is also at times a First Amendment issue. Yesterday, a three-judge federal court panel tossed Maryland's most recent redistricting, and ordered them to redraw before 2020, on the grounds that the state had violated the free speech rights of the Republican plaintiffs in MD-6 by diluting their voices with a politically-motivated redistricting. |
well, yes, and since you haven't offered any evidence, then are you? LOL
Those amendments are clearly there to make any voting, where it is provided for, fair and equal, not to guarantee a right to vote.
If such a right existed, then you'd have lawsuits every single time a new law is passed (because I didn't get to vote on it)
edit - by "right to vote", I'm speaking of the individual right to vote, and again, there is no guarantee of any individual right to vote, only that if there is a general vote, it has to be fair, equal, etc...
Last edited by UncleJD on 11/8/18 4:00 pm; edited 1 time in total |
Golf Cart Mafia Consigliere
Posts: 3138
11/8/18 3:52 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Eddie Robbins |
| That is correct, JD. It means that IF a state holds a vote, they can’t discriminate against anybody by not allowing their vote. |
Acts-pert Poster
Posts: 16509
11/8/18 3:56 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| Re: Racist Gillum appealing to "white guilt" (V) |
Dave Dorsey |
| UncleJD wrote: | Those amendments are clearly there to make any voting, where it is provided for, fair and equal, not to guarantee a right to vote.
If such a right existed, then you'd have lawsuits every single time a new law is passed (because I didn't get to vote on it) |
I'm not aware of anyone saying there's a constitutional right to vote? There is a lot of constitutional protection bordering the issue of voting, though, as I described.
Civil rights and constitutionally-protected rights don't always perfectly overlap. In my opinion, enfranchisement of ex-felons who have fully completed their sentences is an example of the former and worth fighting for, even if it is still each state's prerogative. There's no constitutional right to low taxes and a generally libertarian economy, either, but I think those are things worth fighting for. |
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 13654
11/8/18 4:02 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| Re: Racist Gillum appealing to "white guilt" (V) |
UncleJD |
| Dave Dorsey wrote: | | I'm not aware of anyone saying there's a constitutional right to vote? There is a lot of constitutional protection bordering the issue of voting, though, as I described. |
The whole thing that you responded to NBF about? The point was that how can a state restore a felon who has served his time, right to vote, but withhold a Constitutionally enumerated right to bear arms? It's a slippery slope is what I think he was getting at. |
Golf Cart Mafia Consigliere
Posts: 3138
11/8/18 4:06 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| Re: Racist Gillum appealing to "white guilt" (V) |
Dave Dorsey |
| UncleJD wrote: | | The whole thing that you responded to NBF about? The point was that how can a state restore a felon who has served his time, right to vote, but withhold a Constitutionally enumerated right to bear arms? It's a slippery slope is what I think he was getting at. |
What slippery slope? Not sure I'm following you there at all.
IMO, it's egregious that felons who have served their sentences are restricted from voting in so many places. It's illiberal and disgusting.
It's all the more egregious that a Constitutionally-protected right is withheld from them. Someone is either still a danger to society -- in which case they should still be in prison, on parole, or on probation -- or they're not. The fact that we have created a permanent underclass from which we happily withhold civil liberties and constitutionally-protected rights is repulsive. |
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 13654
11/8/18 4:09 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| Re: Racist Gillum appealing to "white guilt" (V) |
UncleJD |
| Dave Dorsey wrote: | | UncleJD wrote: | | The whole thing that you responded to NBF about? The point was that how can a state restore a felon who has served his time, right to vote, but withhold a Constitutionally enumerated right to bear arms? It's a slippery slope is what I think he was getting at. |
What slippery slope? Not sure I'm following you there at all.
IMO, it's egregious that felons who have served their sentences are restricted from voting in so many places. It's illiberal and disgusting.
It's all the more egregious that a Constitutionally-protected right is withheld from them. Someone is either still a danger to society -- in which case they should still be in prison, on parole, or on probation -- or they're not. The fact that we have created a permanent underclass from which we happily withhold civil liberties and constitutionally-protected rights is repulsive. |
Then if they've served their time, then let them have guns again. Maybe you agree with that, I might agree as well, but the law doesn't and many if not most people don't. |
Golf Cart Mafia Consigliere
Posts: 3138
11/8/18 4:10 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| Re: Racist Gillum appealing to "white guilt" (V) |
Dave Dorsey |
| UncleJD wrote: | | Then if they've served their time, then let them have guns again. Maybe you agree with that |
?? That's exactly what I was saying.
BTW - you have almost certainly committed multiple felonies in your life. The US code is so complex, and so many things are felonies, that most people have likely committed them multiple times. This is a good book on the subject: https://smile.amazon.com/Three-Felonies-Day-Target-Innocent/dp/1594035229
So in all likelihood, the only thing standing between you and disenfranchisement and the revocation of your constitutional rights is the fact that you haven't yet bumped into a prosecutor who was looking to use you as a case study to voters that he is "tough on crime".
Something to keep in mind when you're thinking about our justice system and how we treat felons who have completed their sentences.
Last edited by Dave Dorsey on 11/8/18 4:20 pm; edited 1 time in total |
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 13654
11/8/18 4:16 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| Re: Racist Gillum appealing to "white guilt" (V) |
UncleJD |
| Dave Dorsey wrote: | | UncleJD wrote: | | Then if they've served their time, then let them have guns again. Maybe you agree with that |
?? That's exactly what I was saying. |
I see that. I'm almost out of steam on this one Dave  But the point was that most people who would want to see their voting rights restored, would probably NOT want to see their gun rights restored. If you do, then that's good, I applaud your consistency. But I think you are in the minority on that. For myself, I'd agree that non-violet felons should have their gun rights restored, but that's besides the point. |
Golf Cart Mafia Consigliere
Posts: 3138
11/8/18 4:19 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| Re: Racist Gillum appealing to "white guilt" (V) |
Dave Dorsey |
| UncleJD wrote: | | But the point was that most people who would want to see their voting rights restored, would probably NOT want to see their gun rights restored. |
Well, that's definitely true -- and probably more than a few people who are supporters of ex-felon enfranchisement are passionate about it solely because it is likely to benefit Democratic candidates. But none of those things have a bearing on whether or not this thing in particular is the right thing to do. |
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 13654
11/8/18 4:21 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| Re: Racist Gillum appealing to "white guilt" (V) |
UncleJD |
| Dave Dorsey wrote: | | UncleJD wrote: | | But the point was that most people who would want to see their voting rights restored, would probably NOT want to see their gun rights restored. |
Well, that's definitely true -- and probably more than a few people who are supporters of ex-felon enfranchisement are passionate about it solely because it is likely to benefit Democratic candidates. But none of those things have a bearing on whether or not this thing in particular is the right thing to do. |
We agree. I wish the Republicans in Florida had been smart enough to add the gun-restoration part as a rider on that bill, I bet it would have been a lot harder to get passed. LOL |
Golf Cart Mafia Consigliere
Posts: 3138
11/8/18 4:23 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| Re: Racist Gillum appealing to "white guilt" (V) |
Dave Dorsey |
| UncleJD wrote: | | We agree. I wish the Republicans in Florida had been smart enough to add the gun-restoration part as a rider on that bill, I bet it would have been a lot harder to get passed. LOL |
Yeah, baby steps I guess. (Who am I kidding, no one will ever care about restoring the right to bear arms.) |
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 13654
11/8/18 4:24 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| Re: Racist Gillum appealing to "white guilt" (V) |
Nature Boy Florida |
| Dave Dorsey wrote: | | UncleJD wrote: | | Then if they've served their time, then let them have guns again. Maybe you agree with that |
?? That's exactly what I was saying.
BTW - you have almost certainly committed multiple felonies in your life. The US code is so complex, and so many things are felonies, that most people have likely committed them multiple times. This is a good book on the subject: https://smile.amazon.com/Three-Felonies-Day-Target-Innocent/dp/1594035229
So in all likelihood, the only thing standing between you and disenfranchisement and the revocation of your constitutional rights is the fact that you haven't yet bumped into a prosecutor who was looking to use you as a case study to voters that he is "tough on crime".
Something to keep in mind when you're thinking about our justice system and how we treat felons who have completed their sentences. |
Wow. That's an interesting post. Which felonies have you committed? Do you mind if I forward your response to the DA? You can let us know if Acts can be accessed in prison.
_________________
Whether you like it or not, learn to love it, because its the best thing going today! |
Acts-pert Poster
Posts: 16619
11/8/18 6:17 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Dave Dorsey |
| NBF -- not sure if you're actually as unintelligent as you come across on this forum, or if it's just a character you like to play. Either way, I don't see a lot of value in conversing with you about complex topics. The book I linked is a good one. Check it out. |
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 13654
11/8/18 7:43 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Nature Boy Florida |
| Dave Dorsey wrote: | | NBF -- not sure if you're actually as unintelligent as you come across on this forum, or if it's just a character you like to play. Either way, I don't see a lot of value in conversing with you about complex topics. The book I linked is a good one. Check it out. |
No, I just have fun with sanctimonious, self righteous oafs.
The "slippery slope" argument is used by liberals and conservatives alike in their arguments - but you reject it off hand and refer us to a "3 felonies a day" rag.
And then call other folks unintelligent. Too funny.
_________________
Whether you like it or not, learn to love it, because its the best thing going today! |
Acts-pert Poster
Posts: 16619
11/9/18 7:53 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Resident Skeptic |
Speaking of felons, the Dade and Broward Democrats are stealing the election.
_________________
"It is doubtful if any Trinitarian Pentecostals have ever professed to believe in three gods, and Oneness Pentecostals should not claim that they do." - Daniel Segraves UPCI |
Acts-dicted
Posts: 8065
11/9/18 8:56 am
|
|
|
| |
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
