it can be used interchangibly with "freedom fighter" from the other side

But for the sake of argument, can we not assume that a particular individual is very much a terrorist?

i think its better to actually examine suspented 'terrorists' on the merits of their methods and goals

This is really skirting around the point of my older question, so I'll ask a different one. Should someone with a warrant for murder be able to vote?

to answer your question, no , i dont think we can justify denying voting rights to 'terrorists' because the word terrorist has no clear definition beyond "enemies of the state"

ah ok

with a warrant? them trying to vote would naturally set off a few bells

Not if we don't require IDs.

i would definitely require an ID

and make IDs totally free

Paid for by tax dollars?

well yea i can easily justify taxation if its a benefit given to literally everybody

But not everyone pays taxes.

ID's cant be that expensive

yes but everyone will eventually pay taxes at some point

Not true.

even if its sales tax

unless you live in the woods foraging in which case you probably don't have an ID anyway

So you're assuming that we'll be able to cover at least the IDs just fine because naturally everybody has to pay state sales tax.

if an ID is needed to vote the state should supply them free of charge

What about Oregon? They have no sales tax.

naturally they can't be willed into existence so it will be paid for by tax

So how do they pay for the IDs out of everyone's pocket fairly?

i'm sure they can find the $10 a person they need to make some ID's

Should they charge you $10 for your ID at he DMV?

I mean, you're gonna pay it anyway in sales tax, right?

no, because then you are creating a financial barrier to voting

No, the financial barrier is there no matter where you put it.

That's a pretty basic economic principle.

When politicians say they're going to reduce the cost of healthcare, they don't really mean that.

It's not possible at actually reduce the cost of the healthcare without actually making the service less valuable.

of course

You can only relocate the cost.

im making a special case for things which are actual rights

like voting

i think financial barriers are infringement

what if the state decided to charge $10,000 for ID's? whats stopping them?

then only the super rich would vote.

this is obviously an extreme case

What I'm saying is you literally cannot eliminate the cost. It has to go somewhere.

likewise infringing on the second amendment by requiring permits, stamps etc which are prohibitively expensive