TexasCHLforum.com

"It may very well be that the current ID standard is not nearly as strict as it should be..."

And that particular bit isn't hairsplitting? We'll have to agree to disagree.

How on earth can anyone possessing a valid I.D. in order to vote narrowly define it as retrogressive? It isn't. It's (once again) common sense.

It's this sort of legal hair splitting ("retrogressive effect" i.e., double speak) that forces common sense out the window...

57Coastie,

Without going into tortured legalize - Common sense should advise that requiring an I.D. to vote isn't unreasonable.

As citizens, none of us care for the bother and expense of licenses of all sorts, but we don't shout "racism" as part of the equation when required to be licensed.

And yes, I understood your reference to "motivation" and reject it as a absurd argument.

Jaguar,

I stand corrected.

Would you know if a simple Texas ID was free in the past or have I been misinformed all along?

Thanks

P.S. I always thought if it was free, I was being discriminated against as all my various licenses' cost came out of my pocket.

Why should others get a free ride...

Just getting a library card requires an I.D. and the list of other things/situations is endless that require I.D. - which is available free upon request if you don't want to bother with a drivers license.

Are all I.D. required things/situation racist or only when it comes to voting?

Wassamatta Bronco, you don't approve of a police state?

gigag04 is one of the good guys in law enforcement...

For all the negative contacts folks might/may have with law enforcement, know there are folks like gigag04 who are there on your side - and also understand most law enforcement is made up of good guys/women like him.

Is this disarming scenario a situation where certain officers (or perhaps mandated by their chief) disagree with the CHL and MPA laws and are doing what they can to discourage the public from lawfully carrying?