“I believe in personal liberty, even if I find some expressions of personal liberty a bit peculiar. I don’t think we should be regulating what people wear but when a citizen comes to deal with the government, particularly to exercise their right to vote, I think it’s entirely reasonable that we say we need to confirm who you are and a facial identification is a reasonable way of doing that.”
1) Showing your face does not "confirm who you are" if you aren't required to produce a photo ID. The Blaney Bill does not require you to produce a photo ID. Hence it fails in its (apparently) intended purpose.
2) If you really wanted to exercise a ballot not your own, you would do it by using the mail-in option, which, once again, the Blaney Bill does nothing to deal with.
Very simple really.
11 comments:
You're not required to show photo ID when you go vote? Everytime I"ve voted, I've been asked for photo ID, so has my husband.
Nope. Rules are here.
http://www.elections.ca/content.aspx?section=res&dir=rep/off/sta_2008&document=p3&lang=e#p3_2
So lets assume the Conservatives are trying to make a statement here. I applaud them. Go into a mosque and refuse take your shoes off. You know what would happen to you? They are free to wear their burkas anytime they want except when they vote. Or perhaps you can go into a polling station with a ski mask on. What do you think would happen?
PK,
That isn't what neither Jason Kenney or Blaney SAY its about. You seem to be suggesting that they are speaking in code. Why do you think that is?
"Go into a mosque and refuse take your shoes off. You know what would happen to you?"
I suspect someone would politely ask me to take them off.
What does that have to do with a bill that targets veiled voters while still doing nothing to compel people to prove who they are before they vote?
Go into a mosque and refuse take your shoes off.
I`ve been in a mosque and nobody asked me to take my shoes off nor were they offended when I didn`t take them off.
Could somebody send Minister Kenny a photo of that young Asian man who got on an airliner in Hong Kong wearing a latex mask showing the face of an old white man?
Is Kenny a fool or does he think we are? No, don't bother answering that.
The minister mentions that there were citizens who voted with ski masks and halloween maks on their face - but the question is, did these people steal someone else's identify?
The point is that when you show up to vote, the first they ask you is not your name - it is always your address. That's how the electoral lists are done - they show that at xx address there are xxx voters and that their names are yyy. As long as you show up with id's that show your correct name and address your can vote.
If you show up with a photo id that is definetely a photo of your face but you have moved and not updated your address, you will not be allowed to vote!
Easy answer.
Fingerprint your ballot.
Wear a ski mask, burka, whatever.. and if the vote is later impugned, will be, more or less, open and shut to prove.
Of course then the Federal Government has, effectively, a fingerprint of every voting Canadian.
The reality is that to a great extent voting in Canada is "on the honour system". I've voted with utility bills as i.d.
Why not just let us use Facebook login's to vote?
The government has raised an issue regarding identification, and response, B.C., shouldn't be simply to criticize - it should be to suggest either:
a) That we don't need to identify voters; or
b) There is a better way.
I'm not seeing much of either from our Liberal friends these days. But that would be too much like taking responsibility, and that's not Michael Ignatieff's way.
Personally, I don't think we should allow mail-in ballots at all - without some affirmative way to identify a voter, preferrably by fingerprint. After the vote, ballots (and fingerprints) are destroyed.
The most you can do with a disguise is steal someone's vote, and you don't need a disguise to do that as photo ID is not required.
Stupid bill.
It's just some read meat for the loyal.
For there to be enough veiled women to game the vote at a federal riding level...
Uhm...how many women wear the veil in canada?
And how many politicians exist of an ideology, they or (let's be honest and take this to the misogynistic reasoning behind this) their MEN decide they should vote to elect?
Is the total less or more than women of all colours whose husbands feel it is the masculine duty to decide who the wedded woman votes for? (try doorknocking in a campaign. This sexist rule of thumb plays out all too often)
In a sane world, sane people know the polling stations keep lists of riding voters names/addresses and when you vote, you're checked off. If tons of 'new' voters show up who aren't on the rolls, a/they're going to have to produce proof of residency and b/they're written down and checked off. Large numbers of 'new' voters are going to be noted. There *are* observers at every polling station for the candidates. They can challenge goings on. Presuming the situation is going to be gamed by veiled women, has to presume, although they won't come out and admit it openly, there are some very stupid and perhaps COLLUSIVE people running the polling stations.
The fearful who are *sincerely* shrieking and running around waving their arms about the perils of the brown Hordes? Have they EVER seen the inside of a poling station, let alone voted? (in times of dropping vote numbers this is a valid demand) Have they ever volunteered in the political process? Have they EVER put in five freaking seconds of working time doing election census or election day vote processing?
Because from here, it looks a lot like, "I don't want to vote because all politicians are crooks of the same odeur, so who cares, but hang on, I don't want 'Them' voting either because 'They' might vote in someone I don't like"
But hey, how about that Egypt, eh? Democracy you betcha. Elections you betcha. Women in veils voting you think?
Post a Comment