The answer to what?
But you’re correct. The status quo is violation of the Constitution.
No it’s not. Just stop.
Of course it is. That’s not even debatable.
No, and everything is debateable. It’s silly to say it’s not.
It’s not?
Why are voter ID laws struck down?
Answer: Because the left claims it impedes the poor from voting.
Why are IDs required to purchase a firearm when impeding the purchase of a firearm is unconstitutional without amending the 2nd.
The reason is we have compromised. The liberal version of compromise is: “I want ALL of your stuff, but if you give me half I’ll try to get the rest later.”
1 Like
Because ID’s don’t impede the purchase of a firearm.
Then how do they impede voting?
By putting unsurmountable obstacles in the way, which needing id for guns doesn’t.
Lol sure.
It’s an insurmountable obstacle for one preferred right, but not for another.
Sure. That’s the way logic works.
Can you vote 365 days a year, are there as many voting places as there are places to buy guns?
No dodging or goalpost shifting allowed.
How is requiring an ID and obstruction for one right, but not for another?
The only correct answer is it can’t be. It’s either an obstruction to neither, and is legal for both. Or it’s an obstruction to both and illegal to both.
That’s nonsense.
Nope I just answered how.
Dismissive post with no substance or debate.
Well done for really thinking this one through. I’m sure many will be swayed to your vast display of mental prowess.
No you didn’t. You’re a paraplegic trying to play verbal dodgeball.
Yes, I dismiss nonsense. My time is too valuable.
That’s the stupidest thing I’ve heard around here in a long, long time.
I love this argument comparing it to voter ID. It leaves them with their proverbial fly open for all to see.
This time there’s two twisting on the hook.
Nope sorry.
It’s obviously not. You’re here. You’re replying.
Yet you just can’t seem to be bothered to provide an actual thought out response to the question posed.
