Moss covered NC Repubs want to make it harder for college students to vote

scottditzen

Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2011
Messages
398
What the hell?

Apr 04, 2013 3:51 PM EDT
By WNCT STAFF - email

RALEIGH, N.C. -

North Carolina Senate Republicans want to make it harder for college students to register to vote on campus.

The senators think that once your child registers to vote, especially if their address is someplace other than your house, they're an adult and you can no longer claim them as a dependent.

The proposal would end tax deductions for parents.

Jay Delancy of the Voter Integrity Project says the legislation is necessary because "college students are easily manipulated" and this would help "protect students from such abuse."

http://www.wnct.com/story/21883389/nc-senate-republicans
 
I have no problem with state level DUI laws. Drunk people on the road is dangerous.

I've done enough research not to buy into that prohibitionist propaganda. So I do have a problem with MY states DUI laws.
 
Actually, this is intended to keep college students from voting TWICE.

Because our Board of Elections is so damn incompetent, it's very easy to be registered in more than one place at the same time.

The easier solutions are not counting provisional ballots as actual votes, and allowing a full voter ID bill. Neither of these will get any Democrat support.
 
Why would any libertarian be opposed to DUI laws? You don't have the right to put someone elses life in danger.

It's not the DUI that's the issue. Drive drunk, get caught, yes, by all means enforce a law, BUT...

It's making DUIs out of .04 BACs, the unconstitutional checkpoints, the so called "implied consent" rules, and so on and so on.

It becomes a racket.
 
Why would any libertarian be opposed to DUI laws? You don't have the right to put someone elses life in danger.

Why would libertarians support pre-crime arrest and conviction? There are several threads on this and you could probably search. There was one about 4 years ago where I challenged all the propaganda put out there by MADD and NHTSA. I've done my due diligence regarding it. I'm not about to beat my head against the wall again. The truth is out there. If you want to find it.
 
Actually, this is intended to keep college students from voting TWICE.

Because our Board of Elections is so damn incompetent, it's very easy to be registered in more than one place at the same time.

The easier solutions are not counting provisional ballots as actual votes, and allowing a full voter ID bill. Neither of these will get any Democrat support.

I always absentee voted when I was in college.
 
Most of those college students voted for Obama. That's why.

Great tactic! More GOP stupid publicity.

“We are not saying any laws were broken,” said Jay DeLancy, of the Voter Integrity Project – NC, “but the Buncombe race showed everyone how easily college students can be manipulated like pawns and these bills will protect students from such abuse.”

I'm going to be in Oberlin College on Sunday to see Ron Paul. He is obviously gonna have an easy time with these students who can be "manipulated like pawns."
:)
 
I always absentee voted when I was in college.

I always did too.

I was not a Delaware resident, and did not feel I should be voting somewhere that I didn't own any property.

My car was registered in New Jersey, and I lived in New Jersey. My summer jobs were in New Jersey. The little bit I made in Delaware during the school year was not subject to Delaware taxes.

Even though I was a member of the University of Delaware College Republicans and a member of the Young Americans for Freedom chapter as well as worked on local Delaware campaigns, I always voted absentee (New Jersey).
 
Why would any libertarian be opposed to DUI laws? You don't have the right to put someone elses life in danger.
Being pulled over on a "routine traffic stop" or checkpoint and failing a breathalyzer does not make one guilty of a crime. Let's start with the police usually having no probably cause in the first place, especially in the case of sobriety checkpoints. There is no injury to a person, destruction of property, and more often than not, no probably cause or possible proof of potential endangerment, which are necessary to qualify it as a crime. Yet this early morning assumption and harassment (in this state) leads to a mandatory month in jail, loss of wages and likely loss of job, classes, fines, and now a shiny new record which is sure to make all your future traffic stops from that day forward much more "exciting." /derail over
 
Back
Top