Texas Voter ID Law Shot Down

[okie556]

So the Feds think the Texas Voter ID Law is not fair for the minorities! REALLY?? Hell I have to show my picture ID just to get my Senior Discount at Sam's Town Casino Buffet. We are talking about casting a vote so something as important as who will be the next President of the United States. Can't prove you are who you say you are........sorry no vote....simple as that.

 

[Randman]

Agreed!

 

[SC-Texas]

This is a problem

 

[Younggun]

So did it get voted down because they didn't want to lose legal votes, or the combination of legal and illegal votes.

 

[RandomHero]

how is this not fair to minorities?

 

[RandomHero]

saying its "not fair to minorities" is a pretty racist thing to say.

 

[hkusp1]

So did it get voted down because they didn't want to lose legal votes, or the combination of legal and illegal votes.

This.

 

[Younggun]

Actually, I guess I should have said "legal minority votes or the combination..."

Apparently they are not concerned with the votes from the rest of us.

Makes me wonder if in 5 years when we (legal citizens) are the minority, will we get special treatment?

 

[okie556]

saying its "not fair to minorities" is a pretty racist thing to say.

Just quoting what the news reported.

 

[Texasjack]

There are 2 things that piss me off about this:
1. You have to show a picture ID to cash a check, travel on an airplane, buy a gun, buy a beer, ....etc. It is NOT unfair to anyone to require a picture ID in order to vote. This is clearly BS that is being used to allow voter fraud and to allow illegal aliens to vote.

2. The number of people pissed off by this is only a tiny fraction of the people who SHOULD be pissed off. What the hell is the matter with you people? Are you that stupid or do you just not care about your country anymore?

 

[Younggun]

They are scared to speak up for fear of pissing off the ''minorities''(illegals) because someone might use that evil ''R'' word that gets thrown around so much.

 

[Driller]

It is already a Texas law that you are required to have some sort of picture identification on you at all times. Just bring that with you when you vote is all the law was saying( If you are voting that means you should have it with you..duh). My brother is a LEO and please correct me if I am wrong but he said that legally if he asks to see some sort of identification and you do not have it, he can arrest you and take you to the police station and have you fingerprinted. Now we all know that LEO do not do this all the time. It gives them an excuse to selectively profile the people their instinct tells them to arrest. Some guy running down the street for exercise is probably not going to have his drivers license but legally he is suppose to have it on him.

 

[matefrio]

It is already a Texas law that you are required to have some sort of picture identification on you at all times.

Where? I don't think there is such a law.

 

[Driller]

Where? I don't think there is such a law.

Believe it is a law on the books but never enforced unless a LEO has a gut feeling he needs to get more information from you. Highly used in a profile way but they will not admit to it. Come on some of you LEO chime in on this and confirm this for me.

 

[facetnated]

David Codrea has an article about this: http://www.examiner.com/gun-rights-...sition-glaringly-inconsistent-with-gun-stance
So, if I don't need a photo ID to vote, why do I need one to exercise an enumerated right?

Richard.

 

[Driller]

David Codrea has an article about this: http://www.examiner.com/gun-rights-...sition-glaringly-inconsistent-with-gun-stance
So, if I don't need a photo ID to vote, why do I need one to exercise an enumerated right?

Richard.

I did not think of that angle..Good point. So I guess that we will not be required to provide any identification when purchasing weapons anymore...hahaha

 

[Driller]

Currently, it is a Class C misdemeanor offense for a person to intentionally refuse to identify himself or herself to a peace officer who has lawfully arrested the person. It is a Class B misdemeanor offense for a person to intentionally give a false or fictitious name, residential address, or date of birth to a peace officer who has lawfully arrested the person or lawfully detained the person. Both offenses are enhanced if, at the time of the offense, the actor was a fugitive from justice.


It is not currently an offense for a person to refuse to identify himself or herself to a peace officer who has lawfully detained the person. Police officers routinely investigate persons found in suspicious places and under suspicious circumstances. The law allows officers to detain these individuals for purposes of an investigation if the officer reasonably believes that the person may be engaged in criminal activity. These detentions are known as Terry stops, referring to the United States Supreme Court case Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1. Although it is well established that an officer may ask a suspect to identify himself during a Terry stop (see, e.g., United states v. Hensley, 469 U.S. 221, 229), it has been an open question whether the suspect can be arrested and prosecuted for refusal to answer. In 2004, the United States Supreme Court answered this question in the case ofHiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court of Nevada, Humboldt County, et al. The Hiibel court held that a state could prosecute a lawfully detained person who refused to identify himself or herself.

 

[Driller]

Big difference between arrested and detained. I would give my name because the cop might get creative and find a reason to arrest me haha. So I guess the answer is that you do not have to have ID on you.

 

[Driller]

Sorry but I had some time and was researching this. Video I think from some Austin Liberal group but an exercise in your rights.

 

[mroper]

You have to have an ID to buy Sudafed. and just about anything else you are doing these days. The state is giving them away from free. how can it be not fair.