Again, missing the point.  He's saying that the media isn't always accurate.  And if you want to post numbers, it should be from a .gov website.  The numbers don't really matter, it's how you found said numbers.

Kinda close. 

One big point is media bias AND people jumping on the first number what is reported AND that people take that as gospel without vetting that information. 

I don't give that much weight for a .gov website in general.  My point was that the data was much different than what was provided as "reference".

Yes,  then again I believe Hawaii's current gun requirements are suppressing 2a rights.  So maybe I am bias.

For example myself.  I have to take off work early, this last election I worked the whole day and overtime.  Then I have to drive to a school cafe, find parking, wait in line,  get all my ID info correct.  Bring a phone (not sure if allowed)  do my final research, then vote.  OR I just go home,  when I feel like it for a couple of weeks find time to get on the computer do a little research and vote.  Stick it in the mail and I'm done.  One of these options appear to be much better for me.

Taking off from work to take care of personal or government business is NOT "suppression".  People who work at gov't offices during normal hours are paid to assist you.  You have to at least make the effort to go to where they work. 

Do you believe everything that's possible on the Internet never existed before the Internet?  How did people pay bills that were due that day?  How did they register cars, deposit money in their bank, apply for a loan, request a Social Security Card or Passport, and so on?  THEY WENT TO THE OFFICES OF THOSE SERVICES DURING NORMAL OFFICE HOURS.

If you worked nights (like my mother did -- 3rd shift from 11PM to 7AM), she had all day if she could maintain her faculties with little to no sleep.  Nobody cried that she had "more access" to gov't offices just because she didn't have to work during normal office hours.

I think you've got a very spoiled, entitled outlook on what "suppression" is.  In this day and age, it's possible for us to vote online.  Doing so would be VERY risky.  Is the gov't refusing to take that risk the equivalent of "suppression?"  The same thing holds true of mail-in and early voting.  REASONABLE accommodation is all that's required, not EVERY accommodation.

Research is a personal RESPONSIBILITY.  You must think nobody in the nation votes without doing that duty first.   

The US is the only major country in the world that allows mail-in voting and early voting.

Everyone else refuses to go down that road because it's TOO SUSCEPTIBLE TO TAMPERING.

SNIP

I think you've got a very spoiled, entitled outlook on what "suppression" is.  In this day and age, it's possible for us to vote online.  Doing so would be VERY risky.  Is the gov't refusing to take that risk the equivalent of "suppression?"  The same thing holds true of mail-in and early voting. REASONABLE accommodation is all that's required, not EVERY accommodation.

That is certainly one that is a scary thought.  In my experience with lawsuits brought upon for construction projects, reasonable is quite a scary concept.  Definitely in jury trials, but even in mediation where the mediator may not be experienced/knowledgeable in engineering and/or construction.  Getting off topic, but that "reasonable" word leaves a lot of room for discretion.  Get a jury filled with the "EVERY accommodation" side, then sad day.  Just like the jury that ruled for someone who got burned by their coffee. . . 

The Post Office has no (ZERO) responsibility for keeping your ballot safe, secure and delivered as expected.  There is NO chain of custody.

When you cast a ballot in person, it is scanned and counted.  The fact you voted is recorded (no double votes).  The ballot is in a controlled environment, can be stored in locked and sealed boxes, and is 100% cast by the person they purported to be IN PERSON.

None of that is accomplished with a mail-in ballot.  Anything can happen to it while it's not being handled by the voter and the elections personnel.

That is certainly one that is a scary thought.  In my experience with lawsuits brought upon for construction projects, reasonable is quite a scary concept.  Definitely in jury trials, but even in mediation where the mediator may not be experienced/knowledgeable in engineering and/or construction.  Getting off topic, but that "reasonable" word leaves a lot of room for discretion.  Get a jury filled with the "EVERY accommodation" side, then sad day.  Just like the jury that ruled for someone who got burned by their coffee. . . 

Reasonable accommodation is the standard for things like the ADA laws for construction and access for the disabled. 

"The reasonable man test" requires that you weigh the cost of accommodations against the impact of the lack of accommodations on the customer, employee, etc.

Risk is part of the cost.  Either you have to spend more to mitigate the additional risk, or you suffer potential damages from the risk.  Either way, you have to ask, "What's the cost?"

In voting, the cost to the election system is obvious this year -- can't trust the outcome no matter WHO you THINK won.  It's that, or some new (expensive) process and tech needs to be employed to maintain election integrity to keep track of ballots.

Could we require fingerprints? Why not?  When you register to vote, place a finger on the reader.  That digital print is now in your record.  When you vote in person, you use a reader to verify you are who you are.  If mailing in, use an app to scan the barcode on the ballot and to scan your fingerprint for matching with the known print.  Once the ballot is complete, TAKE A PICTURE OF IT and upload.  Now, if the ballot is lost in the mail, destroyed, spoiled or altered enroute to the clerk, they will have a digital image to compare.  If they need, they can create a duplicate of the ballot based on your image.

All of this is very possible, but the Dems won't allow any measure that increases security.  Fighting against voter's presenting an ID at the poll is proof (not just evidence).

If you watch this video, see which side of the issue you fall on, and what that says about YOU.

Reasonable accommodation is the standard for things like the ADA laws for construction and access for the disabled. 

"The reasonable man test" requires that you weigh the cost of accommodations against the impact of the lack of accommodations on the customer, employee, etc.

Risk is part of the cost.  Either you have to spend more to mitigate the additional risk, or you suffer potential damages from the risk.  Either way, you have to ask, "What's the cost?"
SNIP

Ya, I hear ya and I believe I likely see reasonable similar to you.  I was just saying that if you get the "wrong" mix in a jury, or even make up in a court, it could go sideways.  I've been involved in a lawsuit that I thought was 100% (well, I know nothing is 100%) that my company wasn't liable.  OMFG we not only were liable, they used that case to make changes in the Highway design code to force design to plan for a drunk driver in the 3x or more legal limit. . . 

Hey "Omni"gun How about we just ask people if they are a registered voter....you know like your home defense scenario. Ask them is they are a family member or a criminal. In your case, there are much more serious consequences.

Ya, I hear ya and I believe I likely see reasonable similar to you.  I was just saying that if you get the "wrong" mix in a jury, or even make up in a court, it could go sideways.  I've been involved in a lawsuit that I thought was 100% (well, I know nothing is 100%) that my company wasn't liable.  OMFG we not only were liable, they used that case to make changes in the Highway design code to force design to plan for a drunk driver in the 3x or more legal limit. . . 

Luckily the election cases are being heard by the judge, not a jury.  And when a case goes before the Supreme Court, we can be sure that at least a majority of justices is reasonable.   

Reasonable accommodation is the standard for things like the ADA laws for construction and access for the disabled. 

"The reasonable man test" requires that you weigh the cost of accommodations against the impact of the lack of accommodations on the customer, employee, etc.

Risk is part of the cost.  Either you have to spend more to mitigate the additional risk, or you suffer potential damages from the risk.  Either way, you have to ask, "What's the cost?"

In voting, the cost to the election system is obvious this year -- can't trust the outcome no matter WHO you THINK won.  It's that, or some new (expensive) process and tech needs to be employed to maintain election integrity to keep track of ballots.

Could we require fingerprints? Why not?  When you register to vote, place a finger on the reader.  That digital print is now in your record.  When you vote in person, you use a reader to verify you are who you are.  If mailing in, use an app to scan the barcode on the ballot and to scan your fingerprint for matching with the known print.  Once the ballot is complete, TAKE A PICTURE OF IT and upload.  Now, if the ballot is lost in the mail, destroyed, spoiled or altered enroute to the clerk, they will have a digital image to compare.  If they need, they can create a duplicate of the ballot based on your image.

All of this is very possible, but the Dems won't allow any measure that increases security.  Fighting against voter's presenting an ID at the poll is proof (not just evidence).

If you watch this video, see which side of the issue you fall on, and what that says about YOU.

Flapp is arguing for bio government database of the population.  Interesting.  Democrats are pro privacy? 

Said database is fait accompli, or soon will be. DNA from your COVID test swab. Moot point.

Flapp is arguing for bio government database of the population.  Interesting.  Democrats are pro privacy?

Do you have a drivers license from the State of Hawaii?

Your fingerprint is already on file if you do.

Do you own guns? 

Your fingerprint is already on file if you do.

Do you have a CCW from another state?

Your fingerprint is already on file if you do.

Have you ever served in the military, been a government employee, or held a government security clearance?

Your fingerprint is already on file if you have.

Shut up about bio government database.  If gun owners have to register our fingerprints, so should everyone who votes.  One civil right is not suppressed by this if another is okay with it.  One might argue that voting is more important than owning a gun, since we KNOW we must exercise that right every election cycle.  Guns are more of a "just in case" proposition for most of us.

Said database is fait accompli, or soon will be. DNA from your COVID test swab. Moot point.

Ohhhh snappppp. Don't get me started on 23 and me. Tin foil.

Reasonable accommodation is the standard for things like the ADA laws for construction and access for the disabled. 

"The reasonable man test" requires that you weigh the cost of accommodations against the impact of the lack of accommodations on the customer, employee, etc.

Risk is part of the cost.  Either you have to spend more to mitigate the additional risk, or you suffer potential damages from the risk.  Either way, you have to ask, "What's the cost?"

In voting, the cost to the election system is obvious this year -- can't trust the outcome no matter WHO you THINK won.  It's that, or some new (expensive) process and tech needs to be employed to maintain election integrity to keep track of ballots.

Could we require fingerprints? Why not?  When you register to vote, place a finger on the reader.  That digital print is now in your record.  When you vote in person, you use a reader to verify you are who you are.  If mailing in, use an app to scan the barcode on the ballot and to scan your fingerprint for matching with the known print.  Once the ballot is complete, TAKE A PICTURE OF IT and upload.  Now, if the ballot is lost in the mail, destroyed, spoiled or altered enroute to the clerk, they will have a digital image to compare.  If they need, they can create a duplicate of the ballot based on your image.

All of this is very possible, but the Dems won't allow any measure that increases security.  Fighting against voter's presenting an ID at the poll is proof (not just evidence).

If you watch this video, see which side of the issue you fall on, and what that says about YOU.

Typically a digital camera picture is not admissible in a court. Only old fashioned
chemical pictures.  Unless you are in Alice's restaurant.
In our society today I have no idea how you can "drop" off the map.
other than voting it is virtually impossible to do a transaction with the
government without ID.  Unless it is to allow Democrats to cheat in voting.
Perhaps I'm unusual, but I'm in so many databases it is disturbing.
Finger prints, probably DNA, obvious physical as I have both Federal
and State issued picture ID's, and a paper trail years long.  I can still
look up what I paid for property taxes in a different state 30 some years ago.
I'm sure most others are the same way.
So why the hell can't an ID be required for voting??
now if you don't want to do any transactions with the Government
that is fine with me,  drop off the map. But since you are no longer playing,
don't move the chess pieces when no one is looking.
Obama was once described this way;
" is like a pigeon playing chess, walks on the board, knocking over pieces,
shitting on the board, and then claiming victory"  That is a paraphrase of course,
but that is what this latest election looks like.

Obama was once described this way;
" is like a pigeon playing chess, walks on the board, knocking over pieces,
shitting on the board, and then claiming victory"  That is a paraphrase of course,
but that is what this latest election looks like.

Except in Biden's case, he thinks he's playing tiddlywinks. 

Knocking over pieces and shitting all over the board are just part of a normal day for him.   

Do you have a drivers license from the State of Hawaii?

Your fingerprint is already on file if you do.

Do you own guns? 

Your fingerprint is already on file if you do.

Do you have a CCW from another state?

Your fingerprint is already on file if you do.

Have you ever served in the military, been a government employee, or held a government security clearance?

Your fingerprint is already on file if you have.

Shut up about bio government database.  If gun owners have to register our fingerprints, so should everyone who votes.  One civil right is not suppressed by this if another is okay with it.  One might argue that voting is more important than owning a gun, since we KNOW we must exercise that right every election cycle.  Guns are more of a "just in case" proposition for most of us.

I have all of those,  but that's beside the point,  I don't support it.  But because I live in this world sometimes I have to do things I don't like.  That's life.

#privacy #freedom

Ohhhh snappppp. Don't get me started on 23 and me. Tin foil.

100% tinfoil gang on this one. 

Typically a digital camera picture is not admissible in a court. Only old fashioned
chemical pictures.  Unless you are in Alice's restaurant.
In our society today I have no idea how you can "drop" off the map.
other than voting it is virtually impossible to do a transaction with the
government without ID.  Unless it is to allow Democrats to cheat in voting.
Perhaps I'm unusual, but I'm in so many databases it is disturbing.
Finger prints, probably DNA, obvious physical as I have both Federal
and State issued picture ID's, and a paper trail years long.  I can still
look up what I paid for property taxes in a different state 30 some years ago.
I'm sure most others are the same way.
So why the hell can't an ID be required for voting??
now if you don't want to do any transactions with the Government
that is fine with me,  drop off the map. But since you are no longer playing,
don't move the chess pieces when no one is looking.
Obama was once described this way;
" is like a pigeon playing chess, walks on the board, knocking over pieces,
shitting on the board, and then claiming victory"  That is a paraphrase of course,
but that is what this latest election looks like.

Wait what?  I'm pretty sure security cam video/photos and cellphones and other digital photos etc have been used in court...

I have all of those,  but that's beside the point,  I don't support it.  But because I live in this world sometimes I have to do things I don't like.  That's life.

#privacy #freedom


100% tinfoil gang on this one.

What you FEEL is beside the point.  The actual point is that I'm not suggesting anything that's not already being done a number of other ways for a variety of other reasons.  Using your "fear of the man having my prints" as an argument against it for voting purposes is beyond ridiculous.

I'm against certain things, too, but I don't live in Make Believe Land, where those things are able to be inconsistently argued against just because you have an opinion.

I was just thinking (I know, very dangerous in my case lol!) that a lot of people showed up at the few polls offered on election day instead of doing the mail voting option.

And they braved long lines, ridiculous wait times, sometimes the cold, and the danger of virus infection.  But they persevered through these difficulties to do their duty and cast their vote.

These are not frivolous or indifferent voters to me.  They would have said "screw this" and gone home.  These people cared about the election process and showed they don't trust the mail for something as responsible and important as voting.

Keep on fighting Mr. President.  Those people in the lines believe what you believe.  And soon many many other people will realize the same.

I was just thinking (I know, very dangerous in my case lol!) that a lot of people showed up at the few polls offered on election day instead of doing the mail voting option.

And they braved long lines, ridiculous wait times, sometimes the cold, and the danger of virus infection.  But they persevered through these difficulties to do their duty and cast their vote.

These are not frivolous or indifferent voters to me.  They would have said "screw this" and gone home.  These people cared about the election process and showed they don't trust the mail for something as responsible and important as voting.

Keep on fighting Mr. President.  Those people in the lines believe what you believe.  And soon many many other people will realize the same.

I think mistrust of the USPS is one of many reasons people waited to vote.

- Put off registering, so they have to show up to register before voting.
- Put off mailing in their mail-in ballot and decided to vote since that was the closest place to drop off a mail-in anyway ("Since I'm going to be there...).
- Misplaced their mail-in ballot.
- Never got their mail-in ballot.
- Wanted to make sure their ballot was filled in correctly -- if the scanner rejects it, they can correct it.
- Dropping ballots in collection boxes or in a mailbox days or weeks before the election puts that ballot at risk of being lost, destroyed, spoiled or altered at any point prior to the polls closing.  More time = more chance of fraud or accident.

I dropped my mail-in ballot into the election drop-off collection box at Mililani Mauka Park & Ride on election day.