I'm very much for the government staying out of everyone's business on every subject, until they are specifically requested by individuals to serve their needs, and then only to the satisfaction and limits that the individual (also known as a member of The People) insists on the government having, so it occurred to me that voter ID laws being problematic are consistent with firearm background checks requiring photo IDs being equally as problematic. Because, it actually is, isn't it?
Thus, if requiring a photo ID for voting is specifically intended or serves to disenfranchise minorities and the elderly—two demographics very likely to not have photo ID for various reasons—from their Constitutionally guaranteed voting rights, wouldn't the exact same logic speak to identical disenfranchisement of the very same groups in terms of the equally Constitutional right to keep and bear arms that the Second Amendment guarantees, if photo identification is required for background checks?
No photo ID, you can't vote, which is bad due to the denial of a Constitutional right. No photo ID, you can't keep and bear arms, is therefore also bad due to the denial of a Constitutional right. Yes?
Seems that if you agree with the first, you MUST agree with the second, and vice-versa. If you do not, then you are an anti-Constitutional hypocrite who despises the principles under which this country was formed, and thus shouldn't live here or enjoy its freedoms.
Seems a reasonable assessment to me.
Edited by ChicagoRonin70, 04 January 2018 - 04:34 PM.