If you previously registered on VGF XenForo boards, you will need to use the forgot password feature in order to be able to post here. If you do not receive a password reset by e-mail, use the contact page or post in registration/login help.

National Dunce Day Discussion Thread

Moderators: Deku Tree, I am nobody

Post Reply
User avatar
I REALLY HATE POKEMON!
Posts: 27500
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2000 1:00 am
Location: California, U.S.A

Post by I REALLY HATE POKEMON! » Mon Jan 02, 2017 1:59 am

[QUOTE="CaptHayfever, post: 1617540, member: 25169"]#1: The tests get written by people who either can't or won't do it right, & they end up being bad tests.
#2: It's a bad test. It's full of trick questions & convoluted, ambiguous instructions deliberately designed to work against a specific demographic.

And remember, "I'm-a Luigi, number one!"[/QUOTE]

It is not impossible to produce an adequate test if that is your implication. Also, of course this test will be designed to work against a specific demographic, unintelligent people. That's sort of the whole purpose, to weed them/me out to some degree (like I said, a point based system could be enacted so we still have some say on certain issues).

User avatar
Random User
Posts: 12668
Joined: Sat Jun 06, 2009 11:54 am
Location: SECRET BASE INSIDE SNAKE MOUNTAIN
Contact:

Post by Random User » Mon Jan 02, 2017 2:07 am

The issue there is that every state test will have to be good for this idea to make sense, but not every state is going to do that. In a system where gerrymandering is legal I can only imagine the new slew of issues voters will face if this idea were implemented and abused nationally. Furthermore, the test Capt linked to was made to keep black people away from their right to vote, as whites were generally exempted from taking it. So how do we determine the best way to go about this test?

It'd have to be compulsory for everyone and federally-made, and even then it's tricky. A lot of people don't feel our federal government will have our best interest at heart. If the test is updated, will we have to all retake it to retain our suffrage? What if we wake up and are just having a bad day and flunk the test? Are we just not allowed to vote that year? There are too many issues with this idea.[DOUBLEPOST=1483337268,1483336914][/DOUBLEPOST]Also the Supreme Court has already banned literacy tests for voting.

User avatar
I REALLY HATE POKEMON!
Posts: 27500
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2000 1:00 am
Location: California, U.S.A

Post by I REALLY HATE POKEMON! » Mon Jan 02, 2017 2:13 am

[QUOTE="SKELETOR, post: 1617542, member: 35827"]The issue there is that every state test will have to be good for this idea to make sense, but not every state is going to do that. In a system where gerrymandering is legal I can only imagine the new slew of issues voters will face if this idea were implemented and abused nationally. Furthermore, the test Capt linked to was made to keep black people away from their right to vote, as whites were generally exempted from taking it. So how do we determine the best way to go about this test?[/quote]

Why isn't every state going to do that, and why can't the federal government ensure it does happen? Also your fear of a system being abused comes with practically any system, that shouldn't be anything more than something to look out for if it actually goes through, otherwise we wouldn't have many systems at all.

Clearly the best way to go about the test is to dole it out fairly to everyone wanting to vote, not just certain people like Capt's test. If you mean specifics as to the contents of the test itself, I don't know.

[quote="SKELETOR]It'd have to be compulsory for everyone and federally-made"]

A lot of people are probably right, I don't think the government always has our best interest in mind either. Ideally there should be some way to keep the test in check, maybe at a state or local level or something, idk.

If the test is updated it should be retaken but only every so often, not much different from other licenses. You need to renew your driver's license so why not your voter's license? I think it technically makes less sense from a right's based perspective to require a license to drive our own cars on public roads but few will deny the necessity of it. I think the principle applies here as well.

[quote="SKELETOR]Also the Supreme Court has already banned literacy tests for voting.[/quote"]

Can something which the Supreme Court banned not be overturned? Also, people say that sometimes they overreach so I don't know if that would stand in the face of a proper system planned out and presented along with a good argument for it.

User avatar
CaptHayfever
Supermod
Posts: 36823
Joined: Tue Jul 16, 2002 1:00 am
Location: (n) - the place where I am
Contact:

Post by CaptHayfever » Mon Jan 02, 2017 12:15 pm

I REALLY HATE PRESENTS!, post: 1617543, member: 18119 wrote:Why isn't every state going to do that
'Cause some of them have extremely corrupt governments.
and why can't the federal government ensure it does happen?
Constitutionally, states run elections, even federal elections. Federal government ensuring the same test nationwide would require a new amendment, which are intentionally hard to pass in the first place, & this country just elected a Congress that ran on an alleged platform of less federal power, not more.
Clearly the best way to go about the test is to dole it out fairly to everyone wanting to vote, not just certain people like Capt's test. If you mean specifics as to the contents of the test itself, I don't know.
We mean the specific contents of the test itself.

A lot of people are probably right, I don't think the government always has our best interest in mind either. Ideally there should be some way to keep the test in check, maybe at a state or local level or something, idk.
If the test is updated it should be retaken but only every so often, not much different from other licenses. You need to renew your driver's license so why not your voter's license? I think it technically makes less sense from a right's based perspective to require a license to drive our own cars on public roads but few will deny the necessity of it. I think the principle applies here as well.
But voting is a constitutionally-guaranteed right; driving isn't.
Can thing which the Supreme Court banned not be overturned?
Only by a constitutional amendment or a subsequent Supreme Court ruling.
Also, people say that sometimes they overreach so I don't know if that would stand in the face of a proper system planned out and presented along with a good argument for it.
People only say that when a ruling goes the way they didn't want.

And remember, "I'm-a Luigi, number one!"

User avatar
I REALLY HATE POKEMON!
Posts: 27500
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2000 1:00 am
Location: California, U.S.A

Post by I REALLY HATE POKEMON! » Mon Jan 02, 2017 3:15 pm

^ That makes sense. So pretty much it's nearly impossible to enact the idea, at least currently. Still, I don't think it is a bad idea in theory.

[quote="CaptHayfever]But voting is a constitutionally-guaranteed right; driving isn't.[/quote]

And why do you say that? We are free to own and operate our vehicles as we see fit and we live in a free country so why aren't we allowed on pubic roads? We have the right to travel. Instead of bothering to formulate my own wording for an argument revolving around that I'll just copy and paste:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_o ... States_law

[quote]The right to travel is a part of the 'liberty' of which the citizen cannot be deprived without due process of law under the Fifth Amendment.[/quote"]

I see no good reason why driving shouldn't be considered a right. Seems like one day someone stated driving is a privilege and everyone just parroted it.

User avatar
I am nobody
Moderator
Posts: 12142
Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2007 7:26 pm
Location: -89.97814998,-42.2333493

Post by I am nobody » Mon Jan 02, 2017 3:24 pm

The right to travel is about exactly that - the government can't tell you that it's illegal for you to leave your house without due process. They can deprive you of specific means of travel, and they already do so for cars, planes, and boats if you don't have a license or insurance.

User avatar
I REALLY HATE POKEMON!
Posts: 27500
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2000 1:00 am
Location: California, U.S.A

Post by I REALLY HATE POKEMON! » Mon Jan 02, 2017 3:28 pm

[QUOTE="I am nobody, post: 1617591, member: 34539"]The right to travel is about exactly that - the government can't tell you that it's illegal for you to leave your house without due process. They can deprive you of specific means of travel, and they already do so for cars, planes, and boats if you don't have a license or insurance.[/QUOTE]

So you think they're legally allowed to stop someone from traveling via motorized wheelchair?

User avatar
I am nobody
Moderator
Posts: 12142
Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2007 7:26 pm
Location: -89.97814998,-42.2333493

Post by I am nobody » Mon Jan 02, 2017 3:30 pm

Try driving your wheelchair down the highway.

User avatar
I REALLY HATE POKEMON!
Posts: 27500
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2000 1:00 am
Location: California, U.S.A

Post by I REALLY HATE POKEMON! » Mon Jan 02, 2017 3:38 pm

[QUOTE="I am nobody, post: 1617593, member: 34539"]Try driving your wheelchair down the highway.[/QUOTE]

How about the city street first? Gotta get to the highway.

User avatar
The Missing Link
Moderator
Posts: 21402
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2000 2:00 am
Location: New Hyrule, VIC, Australia
Contact:

Post by The Missing Link » Mon Jan 02, 2017 6:38 pm

[QUOTE="I REALLY HATE PRESENTS!, post: 1617589, member: 18119"]And why do you say that? We are free to own and operate our vehicles as we see fit and we live in a free country so why aren't we allowed on pubic roads? We have the right to travel.[/QUOTE]
I wanted to go back to this point and make a clarification on there.

Yes, you have the right to travel/mobility. However, you are not free to own and operate vehicles as you see fit. Those two aren't synonymous.

Yes, you're free to own a car if you want. However, to use said car, you must first register the vehicle with your state; failure to do so before operating the car is illegal. You must also acquire a valid driver's license with the state; failure to do that and operate the car is illegal. You must also follow the legislation governing the rules of the road; failure to operate the vehicle safely is illegal. You must also keep your license, which the state can handily revoke if they believe you're a sufficient threat to other motorists.

There's no "freedom to do as you see fit." There limitations and provisos.

In the same vein, if you're constantly going on mass transportation and threatening/harassing other passengers, you can be evicted from the bus/tram/train/etc. It's also theoretically possible to be legally banned from a service if you abuse it too much.

The state can't prevent you from walking from some place to another place... oh wait, they kind of can too with restraining orders and house arrest. Though certainly, those are more restrictive cases and aren't the norm. But I include them for completion's sake.
Carpe Pullum Domesticum! (Seize the Cucco!) Image

User avatar
I am nobody
Moderator
Posts: 12142
Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2007 7:26 pm
Location: -89.97814998,-42.2333493

Post by I am nobody » Mon Jan 02, 2017 10:02 pm

^Restraining orders and and house arrest are punishments imposed after due process, though. Congress can't just pass a law saying you can't leave your house.

User avatar
The Missing Link
Moderator
Posts: 21402
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2000 2:00 am
Location: New Hyrule, VIC, Australia
Contact:

Post by The Missing Link » Mon Jan 02, 2017 10:04 pm

^ Yes. That's essentially my point though.

The point is that rights can be taken away. Rights aren't absolute. Just as felons can't vote in some states, there's limitations on rights and freedoms. Rights and freedoms merely provide a comfortable barrier for people against unreasonable legislation.
Carpe Pullum Domesticum! (Seize the Cucco!) Image

User avatar
I am nobody
Moderator
Posts: 12142
Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2007 7:26 pm
Location: -89.97814998,-42.2333493

Post by I am nobody » Mon Jan 02, 2017 10:26 pm

The right to travel is a part of the 'liberty' of which the citizen cannot be deprived without due process of law under the Fifth Amendment.
Was just pointing out that IRHP had already acknowledged restrictions from courts.

User avatar
The Missing Link
Moderator
Posts: 21402
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2000 2:00 am
Location: New Hyrule, VIC, Australia
Contact:

Post by The Missing Link » Mon Jan 02, 2017 11:37 pm

Fair enough.

Automobile registration, the issuance of drivers licenses, and the rules of the road are not that.
Carpe Pullum Domesticum! (Seize the Cucco!) Image

User avatar
ScottyMcGee
Posts: 4902
Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 10:28 pm
Location: New Jersey
Contact:

Post by ScottyMcGee » Thu Jan 05, 2017 10:18 am

[QUOTE="I am nobody, post: 1617593, member: 34539"]Try driving your wheelchair down the highway.[/QUOTE]

I'm reminded of the time I saw a guy driving a motorized wheelchair down the road while texting. Like he wasn't using the sidewalk and drove alongside the sidewalk. I thought to myself, "That's probably how he got in a wheelchair in the first place."
SUPER FIGHTING ROBOT

User avatar
Bad Dragonite
Posts: 8649
Joined: Tue Oct 03, 2006 7:24 pm
Location: Hetalia

Post by Bad Dragonite » Mon Jan 23, 2017 2:36 am

I had that happen to me today. There's a guy who just rides his wheelchair down the road to come to the store I work at regularly and apparently goes other places. I mean he doesn't really break any laws I think. I suppose you could treat it like you would a bicyclist. Plus who wants to be the A-hole to try and stop a crippled man from trying to be independent?
-Bow Chika Bow Wow
-Your offense only makes me stronger.

User avatar
ScottyMcGee
Posts: 4902
Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 10:28 pm
Location: New Jersey
Contact:

Post by ScottyMcGee » Tue Jan 24, 2017 10:59 am

So how about that National Day of Patriotic Devotion, comrades?
SUPER FIGHTING ROBOT

Post Reply

Return to “Politics, Philosophy, and Religion”