Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com > General Discussion Forums > The Club House > Your take on an old issue

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-06-2008, 04:42 AM   #1
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
matt g's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,885
Liked 7 Times on 5 Posts

Default 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?

__________________

Last edited by matt g; 01-06-2008 at 04:22 PM.
matt g is offline  
 
Reply With Quote

Join FirearmsTalk.com Today - It's Free!

Are you a firearms enthusiast? Then we hope you will join the community. You will gain access to post, create threads, private message, upload images, join groups and more.

Firearms Talk is owned and operated by fellow firearms enthusiasts. We strive to offer a non-commercial community to learn and share information.

Join FirearmsTalk.com Today! - Click Here


Old 01-06-2008, 05:54 AM   #2
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
MarkoPo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Hillsdale,Michigan
Posts: 135
Default

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.

__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by billdeserthills View Post
Want to be safe - Learn to take some responsibility for your own safety!
Proud NRA member
MarkoPo is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2008, 12:51 PM   #3
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
hillbilly68's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,000
Liked 2 Times on 2 Posts

Default

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.

__________________

________________________________________
"I'm your brother, just make it count."

hillbilly68 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2008, 11:49 PM   #4
bkt
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 6,973
Liked 1302 Times on 661 Posts
Likes Given: 151

Default

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.

__________________
bkt is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2008, 12:46 AM   #5
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 573
Liked 2 Times on 2 Posts

Default

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

__________________
Righteous is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2008, 01:31 AM   #6
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 296
Liked 1 Times on 1 Posts

Default

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.

__________________
1984cj is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2008, 03:30 AM   #7
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
matt g's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,885
Liked 7 Times on 5 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1984cj View Post
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.
__________________
matt g is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2008, 03:34 AM   #8
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 140
Liked 6 Times on 3 Posts

Default

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.

__________________
Duck is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2008, 09:32 AM   #9
bkt
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 6,973
Liked 1302 Times on 661 Posts
Likes Given: 151

Default

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?

__________________
bkt is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2008, 12:28 PM   #10
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
hillbilly68's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,000
Liked 2 Times on 2 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bkt View Post
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.
__________________

________________________________________
"I'm your brother, just make it count."

hillbilly68 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Firearms Forum Replies Last Post
Glock 36 issue wolfshead Glock Forum 10 06-29-2009 03:03 AM
AR Kit #1 Came- Loading Issue Vertiviper AR-15 Discussion 5 05-20-2009 08:56 PM
Curious GS issue... supergus 1911 Forum 1 01-08-2009 01:51 AM
another 10/22 issue vegasjeepguy .22 Rifle/Rimfire Discussion 7 12-20-2008 03:50 PM