License to Vote? - General - Facepunch Forum

[QUOTE=markfu;27201993] Didn't they do something like this to keep blacks from voting?[/QUOTE] There were laws similar to this called the "Jim Crow Laws" that were instituted in the south. It required blacks to take literacy exams and pay a poll tax in order to vote.

Regardless of how informed, people should have an equal right to vote across all areas.

Hmm...still torn... Thing is, we've GOT to get people making good decisions. This is one idea, like I said I'm not even certain it's the right idea, probably not. I don't see things getting a lot better in the US. Dems and Reps don't look like they'll EVER see eye to eye, and the extremism is getting out of control. To the unaware, it's extremely difficult to tell which side of any argument is in the right, and even given how freely we can access information these days, I don't see the day coming when people will go out of their way to be sure of the facts of these things. It has simply become apparent to me that things are beginning to seriously not work. SOMETHING has to give. This was an idea for that, but if that doesn't work, what then?

[QUOTE=J-Dude;27202402]Hmm...still torn... Thing is, we've GOT to get people making good decisions. This is one idea, like I said I'm not even certain it's the right idea, probably not. I don't see things getting a lot better in the US. Dems and Reps don't look like they'll EVER see eye to eye, and the extremism is getting out of control. To the unaware, it's extremely difficult to tell which side of any argument is in the right, and even given how freely we can access information these days, I don't see the day coming when people will go out of their way to be sure of the facts of these things. It has simply become apparent to me that things are beginning to seriously not work. SOMETHING has to give. This was an idea for that, but if that doesn't work, what then?[/QUOTE] Can you please provide insight as to how "things are beginning to seriously not work"?

[QUOTE=JohnStamosFan;27201780]No. People who give a shit. That's the whole point. We want people who actually care to be doing things that make the decisions. A bunch of retards who can just walk in a do it for fun it stupid. If people aren't willing to study for the chance to vote, why would you expect them to put enough time and effort into making themselves aware of what the fuck they are even voting for?[/QUOTE] As a single persons vote doesn't really count, he might think that it's stupid to take some goddamn exam and study for it practically for nothing. And the next thing you notice, 20% of the people arsed to take the exam and vote.

[QUOTE=J-Dude;27202402]Hmm...still torn... Thing is, we've GOT to get people making good decisions. This is one idea, like I said I'm not even certain it's the right idea, probably not. I don't see things getting a lot better in the US. Dems and Reps don't look like they'll EVER see eye to eye, and the extremism is getting out of control. To the unaware, it's extremely difficult to tell which side of any argument is in the right, and even given how freely we can access information these days, I don't see the day coming when people will go out of their way to be sure of the facts of these things. It has simply become apparent to me that things are beginning to seriously not work. SOMETHING has to give. This was an idea for that, but if that doesn't work, what then?[/QUOTE] Good is a subjective term. Just because you think something is good doesn't mean someone else does.

[QUOTE=J-Dude;27202402]Hmm...still torn... Thing is, we've GOT to get people making good decisions. This is one idea, like I said I'm not even certain it's the right idea, probably not. I don't see things getting a lot better in the US. Dems and Reps don't look like they'll EVER see eye to eye, and the extremism is getting out of control. To the unaware, it's extremely difficult to tell which side of any argument is in the right, and even given how freely we can access information these days, I don't see the day coming when people will go out of their way to be sure of the facts of these things. It has simply become apparent to me that things are beginning to seriously not work. SOMETHING has to give. This was an idea for that, but if that doesn't work, what then?[/QUOTE] I have this ground-breaking idea, what if they both are right? Like, rich people don't like to be taxed more than the poor people? But that would mean there would be more than one party for people to vote on... OH WAIT I THINK I JUST FIGURED OUT THE TWO-PARTY SYSTEM And how things just won't work? With ideas like this you will wind up into even more shittier scenarios.

[QUOTE=evilking1;27202670]As a single persons vote doesn't really count, he might think that it's stupid to take some goddamn exam and study for it practically for nothing. And the next thing you notice, 20% of the people arsed to take the exam and vote.[/QUOTE] And if everyone thought their single vote didn't matter than no one would vote. The point is, why not make voting something that you should invest a little time in. You can't get a decent job without going to school and educating yourself for years, yet to ask people to take a simple test (I'm not saying they should be able to list all the presidents from first to last, or ramble off some random court case and decision, just know the basics) is crazy? I feel voting is the one thing is this country you just get to do, but should be earned. You have to work to come to America, why not work to be a part of the system of America?

[QUOTE=JohnStamosFan;27202824]And if everyone thought their single vote didn't matter than no one would vote. The point is, why not make voting something that you should invest a little time in. You can't get a decent job without going to school and educating yourself for years, yet to ask people to take a simple test (I'm not saying they should be able to list all the presidents from first to last, or ramble off some random court case and decision, just know the basics) is crazy? I feel voting is the one thing is this country you just get to do, but should be earned. [b]You have to work to come to America, why not work to be a part of the system of America?[/b][/QUOTE] But I was born here.

[QUOTE=JohnStamosFan;27202824]And if everyone thought their single vote didn't matter than no one would vote. The point is, why not make voting something that you should invest a little time in. You can't get a decent job without going to school and educating yourself for years, yet to ask people to take a simple test (I'm not saying they should be able to list all the presidents from first to last, or ramble off some random court case and decision, just know the basics) is crazy? I feel voting is the one thing is this country you just get to do, but should be earned. You have to work to come to America, why not work to be a part of the system of America?[/QUOTE] Because it's fucking stupid and useless. You vote for somebody to do the thinking and voting for you - this isn't any ancient greece where you shout your opinion at the village center. If voting isn't a right but rather a privilege - doesn't that mean that we serve the ones we voted for, not vice versa? Then what about a food-poll too. Nothing special, just list what does a Whopper have between the bread etc - that way you can get a food license. Or how about a walking license?

[QUOTE=Mr Dinosaur;27202869]But I was born here.[/QUOTE] So then asking you to take 10 minutes out of your day to look through a small booklet to get licensed to vote is ridiculous? I don't get why you need a license for a pistol, to hunt, to drive, or to operate some machinery, but you are allowed to vote about things regardless of the fact that you may know nothing at all. [editline]4th January 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=evilking1;27202901]Because it's fucking stupid and useless. You vote for somebody to do the thinking and voting for you - this isn't any ancient greece where you shout your opinion at the village center. Then what about a food-poll too. Nothing special, just list what does a Whopper have between the bread etc - that way you can get a food license. Or how about a walking license?[/QUOTE] Your walking and eating don't affect the nation. Nice try.

[QUOTE=JohnStamosFan;27202926] Your walking and eating don't affect the nation. Nice try.[/QUOTE] They all would be stupid ideas that don't gain anything. What would be gained by this license? Do you think it would change peoples opinions - and how?

[QUOTE=JohnStamosFan;27202926]So then asking you to take 10 minutes out of your day to look through a small booklet to get licensed to vote is ridiculous? I don't get why you need a license for a pistol, to hunt, to drive, or to operate some machinery, but you are allowed to vote about things regardless of the fact that you may know nothing at all. [editline]4th January 2011[/editline] Your walking and eating don't affect the nation. Nice try.[/QUOTE] Waste of resources and overall pointless.

[QUOTE=evilking1;27203043]They all would be stupid ideas that don't gain anything. What would be gained by this license? Do you think it would change peoples opinions - and how?[/QUOTE] I've already said what would be gained. It's not about changing people's opinions. People can still like whatever the fuck they want. I just think that when you are voting for something as important as government, like who makes the big decisions in the white house, who holds veto power, who decided what countries we are going to make friendly with, and who we will invade, i want those decisions to be made by people who could at least put 10 minutes into gaining that ability. I don't give a shit what you eat, and testing to order at Burger King is stupid. Voting for who runs this country is not. I don't get why you don't shit down both legs at the idea of having to drive a certain number of hours to be trusted with a car and your own mind, yet you should be allowed to vote for whatever and whoever regardless of the cost to you or anyone else.

[QUOTE=JohnStamosFan;27203135]I've already said what would be gained. It's not about changing people's opinions. People can still like whatever the fuck they want. I just think that when you are voting for something as important as government, like who makes the big decisions in the white house, who holds veto power, who decided what countries we are going to make friendly with, and who we will invade, i want those decisions to be made by people who could at least put 10 minutes into gaining that ability. I don't give a shit what you eat, and testing to order at Burger King is stupid. Voting for who runs this country is not. I don't get why you don't shit down both legs at the idea of having to drive a certain number of hours to be trusted with a car and your own mind, yet you should be allowed to vote for whatever and whoever regardless of the cost to you or anyone else.[/QUOTE] so in other words the only gain is that lazy people, or people with the IQ of 20 that otherwise wouldn't vote will not vote? ok.

[QUOTE=Mr Dinosaur;27203102]Waste of resources and overall pointless.[/QUOTE] I just don't understand how you find testing for voting pointless. Do you think testing to be able to do other things is pointless? [editline]4th January 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=evilking1;27203186]so in other words the only gain is that lazy people, or people with the IQ of 20 that otherwise wouldn't vote will not vote? ok.[/QUOTE] I've said this already. If you can't be bothered to take 10 minutes to test to vote, then why should you be expected to take the time it takes to get yourself some accurate information on what you are voting for? Fuck it, why test for driving then? It's not like it affects the country. We can just let any person onto the roads, regardless of their vision, or their ability to drive.

[QUOTE=JohnStamosFan;27203196]I just don't understand how you find testing for voting pointless. Do you think testing to be able to do other things is pointless?[/QUOTE] You said it would take ten minutes to read the small booklet. I'm sorry but that takes about as much time as signing up for a website. What's the same in both? People don't read the ToS and if they have to they skim it then forget about it. It would be a waste of tax payer's dollars to print out millions of books that will be disregarded in no less than thirty minutes. [editline]5th January 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=JohnStamosFan;27203196]I just don't understand how you find testing for voting pointless. Do you think testing to be able to do other things is pointless? [editline]4th January 2011[/editline] I've said this already. If you can't be bothered to take 10 minutes to test to vote, then why should you be expected to take the time it takes to get yourself some accurate information on what you are voting for? Fuck it, why test for driving then? It's not like it affects the country. We can just let any person onto the roads, regardless of their vision, or their ability to drive.[/QUOTE] This post is terrible. Letting someone with poor vision on the road could be detrimental to human lives.

[QUOTE=Mr Dinosaur;27203297]You said it would take ten minutes to read the small booklet. I'm sorry but that takes about as much time as signing up for a website. What's the same in both? People don't read the ToS and if they have to they skim it then forget about it. It would be a waste of tax payer's dollars to print out millions of books that will be disregarded in no less than thirty minutes.[/QUOTE] I'm not saying their should be a campaign where you send books door to door. It would be much like getting your citizenship, or your gun license, or your driving license. You go in, you grab a book (Like those 6 or so page books at the DMV that tell you the basics of driving, what the signs are, etc.) and you look through it. The test should be mostly simple things, stuff that you learn in high school history/government class. Like i said before, i don't think it should be "What Battle did George Washington suffer is first defeat in?" or things like that. But i think it's fair to expect someone to not think of Ben Franklin as their favorite dead president.

[QUOTE=JohnStamosFan;27203196]I just don't understand how you find testing for voting pointless. Do you think testing to be able to do other things is pointless? [/QUOTE] A driving license - driving without knowing the rules could kill someone A hunting license - if you don't know the species you might kill the ones you aren't allowed to kill A voting license - if you vote wrong you could - get a new hitler in power? "Ooh that name sounds fancy I vote for hitler" A eating license - if you don't know what you eat you might get fat As you can see even a eating license makes a lot more sense, you American chubbies. [editline]5th January 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=JohnStamosFan;27203385]I'm not saying their should be a campaign where you send books door to door. It would be much like getting your citizenship[/QUOTE] hey why not test everybody for citizenship when they turn 18, if they don't pass we ship them out to mexico, how that sounds

[QUOTE=evilking1;27203398]A driving license - driving without knowing the rules could kill someone A hunting license - if you don't know the species you might kill the ones you aren't allowed to kill A voting license - if you vote wrong you could - get a new hitler in power? "Ooh that name sounds fancy I vote for hitler" A eating license - if you don't know what you eat you might get fat As you can see even a eating license makes a lot more sense, you American chubbies.[/QUOTE] Stop being an ass. You're trying to tell me you think that shooting the wrong species of deer is more important than who you elect into office? You are obviously not taking this seriously...

[QUOTE=JohnStamosFan;27203385]I'm not saying their should be a campaign where you send books door to door. It would be much like getting your citizenship, or your gun license, or your driving license. You go in, you grab a book (Like those 6 or so page books at the DMV that tell you the basics of driving, what the signs are, etc.) and you look through it. The test should be mostly simple things, stuff that you learn in high school history/government class. Like i said before, i don't think it should be "What Battle did George Washington suffer is first defeat in?" or things like that. But i think it's fair to expect someone to not think of Ben Franklin as their favorite dead president.[/QUOTE] 6 pages my ass. My driving book was well over 150 pages. Also, a government sent "how to vote" test would almost definitely contain bias. [editline]5th January 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=JohnStamosFan;27203435]Stop being an ass. You're trying to tell me you think that shooting the wrong species of deer is more important than who you elect into office? You are obviously not taking this seriously...[/QUOTE] You obviously aren't taking this seriously. Do you honestly want to waste millions on a test that will change absolutely nothing?

[QUOTE=Mr Dinosaur;27203297]You said it would take ten minutes to read the small booklet. I'm sorry but that takes about as much time as signing up for a website. What's the same in both? People don't read the ToS and if they have to they skim it then forget about it. It would be a waste of tax payer's dollars to print out millions of books that will be disregarded in no less than thirty minutes. [editline]5th January 2011[/editline] This post is terrible. Letting someone with poor vision on the road could be detrimental to human lives.[/QUOTE] Letting someone into office who doesn't care about the health care system in the country would kill more people than one person in a car.

[QUOTE=JohnStamosFan;27203435]Stop being an ass. You're trying to tell me you think that shooting the wrong species of deer is more important than who you elect into office? You are obviously not taking this seriously...[/QUOTE] The hunting exam provides you with the tools to not to mistake a cat to a deer. How the voting test changes who you elect into office - "How to spot a communist" on page 5? Or does it state "Vote for the person who shares the same opinions with you"? Oh man that sure saved a lot of jews from voting the next Hitler.

This is a terrible idea. Who are you to say somebody's opinion is stupid?

[QUOTE=JohnStamosFan;27203484]Letting someone into office who doesn't care about the health care system in the country would kill more people than one person in a car.[/QUOTE] A-ha. Here we go to the opinions. If I can afford a proper health insurance from the private market, why would I want to pay for the poor peoples health insurance too? And if I can't afford, why wouldn't I want a proper "free" healthcare? This is why we vote for the person that shares our opinions. How would the exam change this. Does knowing how many seats the Senate has do a jack shit about anything? Does the exam ask that "person X will run the country like a shithole, would u vote for him y/n"

[QUOTE=JohnStamosFan;27203484]Letting someone into office who doesn't care about the health care system in the country would kill more people than one person in a car.[/QUOTE] So you're saying that a test on voting is more important than testing? Ok. [editline]5th January 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=evilking1;27203545]A-ha. Here we go to the opinions. If I can afford a proper health insurance, why would I want to pay for the poor peoples health insurance too? And if I can't afford, why wouldn't I want a proper "free" healthcare? This is why we vote for the person that shares our opinions. How would the exam change this. Does knowing how many seats the Senate has do a jack shit about anything?[/QUOTE] Pretty much this

[QUOTE=evilking1;27203505]The hunting exam provides you with the tools to not to mistake a cat to a deer. How the voting test changes who you elect into office - "How to spot a communist" on page 5? Or does it state "Vote for the person who shares the same opinions with you"? Oh man that sure saved a lot of jews from voting the next Hitler.[/QUOTE] A Hunting exam doesn't tell you the difference between a deer and a cat, just the same as an exam to vote wouldn't tell you the difference between voting for the republican who wants to cut spending on schools and put it into more military upgrades, or the liberal who wants to take all of the funding away from defending airports and harbors and put that into a project to build more parks across the country. And i don't expect it to. The test is simply to weed out people who can't be bothered to educate themselves on the issue. By your standards, any test is stupid because it doesn't tell you what to do. My driving booklet didn't mention a word about driving in the rain or snow, but it's still required that i take it. [editline]4th January 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=evilking1;27203545]A-ha. Here we go to the opinions. If I can afford a proper health insurance, why would I want to pay for the poor peoples health insurance too? And if I can't afford, why wouldn't I want a proper "free" healthcare? This is why we vote for the person that shares our opinions. How would the exam change this. Does knowing how many seats the Senate has do a jack shit about anything?[/QUOTE] I said nothing about a free health care system. The government is a part of health care, be it free, or paid for out of pocket. Would it be better if you had to test before voting on the specific ballot items? Say testing over what the main issues were of each voting item?

[QUOTE=JohnStamosFan;27203600]A Hunting exam doesn't tell you the difference between a deer and a cat, just the same as an exam to vote wouldn't tell you the difference between voting for the republican who wants to cut spending on schools and put it into more military upgrades, or the liberal who wants to take all of the funding away from defending airports and harbors and put that into a project to build more parks across the country. And i don't expect it to. The test is simply to weed out people who can't be bothered to educate themselves on the issue. By your standards, any test is stupid because it doesn't tell you what to do. My driving booklet didn't mention a word about driving in the rain or snow, but it's still required that i take it.[/QUOTE] What kind of questions would you propose be included?

[QUOTE=JohnStamosFan;27203600]A Hunting exam doesn't tell you the difference between a deer and a cat, just the same as an exam to vote wouldn't tell you the difference between voting for the republican who wants to cut spending on schools and put it into more military upgrades, or the liberal who wants to take all of the funding away from defending airports and harbors and put that into a project to build more parks across the country. And i don't expect it to. The test is simply to weed out people who can't be bothered to educate themselves on the issue. By your standards, any test is stupid because it doesn't tell you what to do. My driving booklet didn't mention a word about driving in the rain or snow, but it's still required that i take it. [editline]4th January 2011[/editline] I said nothing about a free health care system. The government is a part of health care, be it free, or paid for out of pocket. Would it be better if you had to test before voting on the specific ballot items? Say testing over what the main issues were of each voting item?[/QUOTE] I'm sorry, but many people can't be bothered to educate themselves on the issue, like poor people who work 3 jobs and get 5 hours of sleep a night.