Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com

Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com (http://www.firearmstalk.com/forums/)
-   The Club House (http://www.firearmstalk.com/forums/f12/)
-   -   Your take on an old issue (http://www.firearmstalk.com/forums/f12/your-take-old-issue-2928/)

matt g 01-06-2008 04:42 AM

Your take on an old issue
 
It used to be, in this country, that the only way you had the right to vote was if you were a land owner. People that owned part of the country were the only ones that had a right to say what happened in it and to it.

Is this such a bad idea? If you're not able to be able to procure a chunk of land somewhere and some how, should you have the right to vote?

MarkoPo 01-06-2008 05:54 AM

That would great for the republican's wouldn't it? People who live in the cities are forced to live in apartments as no real estate is available. If you count condo's you technically get no land, only a place to live. Some people who travel for a career are forced to live in apartments or rented houses. I think it would take voting rights away from too many people. None of the college students who live on campus could vote, no one who lives in a metro city, people who's job requires them to travel all the time, and alot of our own young military. I say bad idea Matt.

hillbilly68 01-06-2008 12:51 PM

Yeah, not a good idea. I see your point though. I do think that one should have to pass a test to vote. Not the old Jim Crow BS tests that were unfair, but a citizenship test. Hey, we have rules that require immigrants to pass a test to become citizens. But as I think about this while I write, it becomes a slippery slope; what rights are we really born with? What other rights would we have to "qualify" for? Where would it stop? We have already handed over our God given rights to man in several cases, I think we should go no further. No, no test. No requirement. Like it or not (and I don't agree with a lot of the US population when it comes to politics and the entitlement mentality) they are citizens and have the right whether they are intelligent, ignorant, have served or have not given back anything to our great country. Wouldn't have it any other way.

bkt 01-06-2008 11:49 PM

If we were an agrarian society where farmers produced the majority of the wealth in the country, you might, somehow, maybe be able to argue a very poor case for that idea. As it is, no, that's not such a good plan.

Equality in the eyes of the law is important. And as much as it might be nice to say "if you receive public assistance, you can't vote" it goes against the grain of who we are culturally and politically.

Righteous 01-07-2008 12:46 AM

I think you only should be allowed to vote if your a member of this forum

1984cj 01-07-2008 01:31 AM

Not so much land owners but people who have served the country in some capacity.

Robert Heinlein/ Starship Troopers.

Only people who had served honorably in the civil services or military could vote. I kind of like that idea.

matt g 01-07-2008 03:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1984cj (Post 13822)
Not so much land owners but people who have served the country in some capacity.

Robert Heinlein/ Starship Troopers.

Only people who had served honorably in the civil services or military could vote. I kind of like that idea.

I absolutely love that book and the ideals contained in it.

Duck 01-07-2008 03:34 AM

The problem lies in that we have now come to the point where some people realize that they can basically vote themselves more money. Just like with some of the dirtbag countries in the UN, you shouldn't have any say in other people's affairs if you can't even keep your own backyard straight.

bkt 01-07-2008 09:32 AM

The problem with granting some citizens the right to determine who's in government and deny others that right is to create two classes of citizenry, one with power over the other.

What would your reaction be if someone suggested that anyone who enjoys firearms is automatically classified a mental defect and a danger to society and should not have the right to vote?

hillbilly68 01-07-2008 12:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bkt (Post 13843)
The problem with granting some citizens the right to determine who's in government and deny others that right is to create two classes of citizenry, one with power over the other.

Dead on the mark. I know we don't like some aspects of the system (especially the vote yourselves more money) but we can't create a separation into power and powerless. I do however believe that we will eventually bankrupt the system if we don't regain a sense of nation, a sense of responsibility (not a sense of entitlement) and some of our future leaders must be true statesmen and not politicians. If we aren't careful we will require a shift from prosperity to survival as a nation.

My 2 cents.


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:03 AM.

Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.