Should the right to vote be restricted?

[Deleted]

Possibly the right should be restricted from voting?

[Aehl]

Well people over 60-70 should not be allowed to vote

.......care to tell us why?

[Elim Garak]

Possibly the right should be restricted from voting?

So only the wrong would vote?

[Zelk]

I mean if there's anyone under-represented in society today it's the military and landlords

[IIamaKing]

Id be fine with having to demonstrate you know the 3 branches of government, how they interact with one another and where the government gets its money from(you might be surprised how many people dont).

[Deleted]

So only the wrong would vote?

In that scenario right would be wrong and left right. As left would have the right but the right wouldn't have the right.
So the only one left must be right.. right?

[Elim Garak]

In that scenario right would be wrong and left right. As left would have the right but the right wouldn't have the right.
So the only one left must be right.. right?

Wrong. If you decide who has the right based on wrong premise only wrong would have the right and we will have to redefine right into wrong. It's the only politically correct way.

[Goobaman]

Its a question I play with from time to time. Why should those that have no investment in a country have any sway in how it's run?

Would we be better off redistricting the much abused right to vote to smaller subgroups of society ? Perhaps those who served in the millitary or at a minimum owned land.

I am curious to hearing people's thoughts on it.

Yes, it should be. But it can't be. The only ways to restrict voting to groups that should not vote start by defining who these groups are.

Who in our government, or another govt, do -you- trust to honestly and fairly define that? This concept dies right here because people.

It would take actually zero time at all for those in power to start bending and warping this to suit their needs. There's no other right answer.

Yes, some groups shouldn't be able to vote. No, this is not feasible. Maybe if robot overlords have the capacity for FULL and untainted objectivity, but even then AI is scarey meng...

[Allybeboba]

LMAO!
Many are in favor of restricting voting as long as it favors them. Color me surprised!!

[cubby]

Its a question I play with from time to time. Why should those that have no investment in a country have any sway in how it's run?

Would we be better off redistricting the much abused right to vote to smaller subgroups of society ? Perhaps those who served in the millitary or at a minimum owned land.

I am curious to hearing people's thoughts on it.

Starship Troopers (book, movie with same title but not really good and ignores the book's moral side) covered something like this way back. You can't get your "franchise" - the right to vote - until you put in a term of service. It's an interesting concept intellectually speaking. However, attempting to implement this kind of idea in the modern United States would be folly.

Any other process or determining factor for getting the right to vote would inevitably lead to racism and disenfranchisement from the GOP - as they have continually perpetuated throughout their history as a party.

So no.

[Deianeira]

It is sadly abused. Few take the time to learn anything about a political party and vote in complete ignorance or at best based off of a attack ad. I vote of no confidence isnt the same as a underused vote. Ones harmless the other isn't.

Wouldnt it be better to stop cutting your education across the country and make sure that ALL citizens get a chance to get real education?

[Deleted]

Its a question I play with from time to time. Why should those that have no investment in a country have any sway in how it's run?

Would we be better off redistricting the much abused right to vote to smaller subgroups of society ? Perhaps those who served in the millitary or at a minimum owned land.

I am curious to hearing people's thoughts on it.

Yes indeed steamship troopers is the best thing to base a future social system on.

Good thinking there.

[Deleted]

Restricted or not I will call my Russian friends to sabotage it.

[Deleted]

Wouldnt it be better to stop cutting your education across the country and make sure that ALL citizens get a chance to get real education?

No it's better restricted to the rich as they are obviously better people.

[Stormspark]

We already have that people below certain mental capabilities already aren’t allowed to vote. If you mean I.Q test for something else the answer is no.

High I.Q can still be stupid even if they aren’t as likely. Sex, money they are still human and can be corrupted.

I didn't say IQ test, because IQ tests are meaningless. I was talking about some sort of hypothetical test that would actually measure intelligence in an unbiased way. No such thing exists.

[Shadowsgrace]

Its a question I play with from time to time. Why should those that have no investment in a country have any sway in how it's run?

Would we be better off redistricting the much abused right to vote to smaller subgroups of society ? Perhaps those who served in the millitary or at a minimum owned land.

I am curious to hearing people's thoughts on it.

Sooo...Pre-Civil War Era US... No thank you. We restrict it by making you get to a specified age, 18. That's it, once you are of "Voting Age" nothing should restrict you farther.

[Saucerian]

Voter ID? Yes. It's not too much to ask that one makes the modest effort to prove they're at least a friggin' citizen of the country to vote.

Beyond that? Not really. I could see requiring proof that you paid taxes within the last year, maybe, but owning land etc? Hard to argue that wouldn't be mainly suppressing the voice of the poor.

[Theodarzna]

While technically no, I do think people who've had children should have their votes count for more, and then for grandchildren and great grandchildren. On the grounds that you are supremely invested then in the future of the country.

[Elim Garak]

While technically no, I do think people who've had children should have their votes count for more, and then for grandchildren and great grandchildren. On the grounds that you are supremely invested then in the future of the country.

That's nepotism.

[Z-Man]

Put an age cap of around 70+. If you can't drive down the street to pickup some milk you shouldn't be able to vote for laws that you'll probably never live to see implemented.

Make it 55. After that point most people are voting on the best way to loot the piggy bank, not on making the world a better place. (Same restriction goes for politicians "Happy Birthday, Senator. Security is here to collect your badge.")