Firearms rally scheduled for Chambersburg's square

Mar 29, 2013 Full story: Chambersburg Public Opinion 11,004

Two local organizations are hosting a Second Amendment Freedom Rally on from noone to 2 p.m. April 6 on Courthouse Plaza in downtown Chambersburg.

Full Story

“HUNTING RIGHTS ADVOCATE”

Since: Oct 08

Boggy Creek

#6011 Aug 27, 2013
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
You said gun education in the schools. I went back and looked for other ideas from you, but that's the only one I saw. What am I missing.
I'd be glad to see evidence of successful in-person voter fraud, because any time I've researched it I find nothing consequential.
The poor, the elderly, and young people are the groups least likely to have the required government issued voter IDs, and those groups tend to vote Democratic. Those people are able to live successful lives without the ID that is being required to vote. And meeting the new requirements places enough of a burden on them that some percentage won't bother voting. The GOP is counting on that number being enough to swing elections in close states. You seem like a smart fellow - how do you not know this?
"only 32k" dead? Seriously, did you just say that?
There is something like one gun for every American, but those guns are owned by 35% of the population. So we're not really talking about the number of guns but the number of gun owners.
I guess it doesn't matter how I word the question, you're going to avoid it. How do you think restricting, regulating, and infringing on my rights is going to do anything to stop others who ignore the law from committing crimes? You know gun control does absolutely nothing to stop criminals from obtaining guns illegally with no background checks or waiting periods, which is how they have always gotten guns.
Marauder

North Pole, AK

#6012 Aug 27, 2013
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
I'd be glad to see evidence of successful in-person voter fraud, because any time I've researched it I find nothing consequential.
.
"I'd be glad to see evidence of successful in-person voter fraud, because any time I've researched it I find nothing consequential."

Not much of a researcher are you...?

Just last week, Melowese Richardson, who worked as an election official in Hamilton County over the last 15 years, pleaded no contest to four charges of voting illegally during three separate elections. According to assistant prosecutor Bill Anderson, other election officials “noticed a bunch of absentee ballots coming from the same place with the same handwriting.” That handwriting was Richardson’s.

In one of the instances, Richardson voted in 2008, 2011 and 2012 in the name of a relative who has been in a coma since 2003.

Richardson’s plea bargain agreement dropped four additional fraud charges. She is now a felon, and faces a potential jail term of up to six years.
This makes Richardson the third Hamilton County resident to be found guilty of vote fraud this year. Two guilty pleas were obtained just last month by county prosecutors, and three other cases of vote fraud are still pending.

http://www.conservativeblog.org/amyridenour/2...

Ohio Voter Fraud Conviction!

http://www.westernjournalism.com/ohio-voter-f...

113 convictions represent small fraction of total unlawful votes

ST. PAUL, Minn., Oct. 13, 2011 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/-- Minnesota Majority today released a report on voter fraud convictions to date stemming from Minnesota's 2008 general election. The report finds that 113 individuals who voted illegally in the 2008 election have been convicted of the crime, "ineligible voter knowingly votes" under Minnesota Statute 201.014.
"As far as we can tell, this is the largest number of voter fraud convictions arising from a single election in the past 75 years," said Minnesota Majority president Jeff Davis, "Prosecutions are still underway and so there will likely be even more convictions."

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/minne...

ROTFLMAO…hey danny…so what is the rate for getting a post that proves you a hypocrite and a liar removed from the forum…?...lol

Your post #5988

“Reading comprehension really isn't your thing, is it? LOL!”

Your post #5989

“I responded to the first sentence of that post. I didn't read the rest of it. Sorry.”

Your post #5990

“I'll tell you what - after you point out a single lie I've actually told …”

You really are one arrogant,“frustrated control freak”. YOU accuse me of lacking reading comprehension after we have an exchange where you post a fact without a source…I post a fact with a source…then you ask me about my source…the same post that you actually responded to…I tell you the source and you tell me I never posted that source. But hey, that’s ok because your own blind arrogance allows you to that…you justify it by saying ““I responded to the first sentence of that post. I didn't read the rest of it. Sorry.”.

YES danny boy…YOU are very sorry

“Until then, knock yourself out. But I'm done wasting my time on your mendacious accusations.
Good day.”

Maybe you can get this one removed also…what’s that rate again…?...you have a good day too…lol
Roger the Man LOL

Clearfield, PA

#6013 Aug 27, 2013
Dan the Man Chambersburg says Obama is a warmonger like Bush was. I'm going to call for Obama's impeachment and demand Obama is tried for treason even if I have to say this everyday for 10 years.

“HUNTING RIGHTS ADVOCATE”

Since: Oct 08

Boggy Creek

#6014 Aug 28, 2013
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
You said gun education in the schools. I went back and looked for other ideas from you, but that's the only one I saw. What am I missing.
I'd be glad to see evidence of successful in-person voter fraud, because any time I've researched it I find nothing consequential.
The poor, the elderly, and young people are the groups least likely to have the required government issued voter IDs, and those groups tend to vote Democratic. Those people are able to live successful lives without the ID that is being required to vote. And meeting the new requirements places enough of a burden on them that some percentage won't bother voting. The GOP is counting on that number being enough to swing elections in close states. You seem like a smart fellow - how do you not know this?
"only 32k" dead? Seriously, did you just say that?
There is something like one gun for every American, but those guns are owned by 35% of the population. So we're not really talking about the number of guns but the number of gun owners.
Your "35% of the population" represents about 110,000,000 people. 32,000 deaths that include suicides and police shootings relative to 110,000,000 lawful gun owners is a microscopic number/percentage. Why not legislate against the small number of individuals who create the problem instead of legislating against those MILLIONS of honest law abiding citizens?

There's that question again Danny Boy.

“Si vis pacem, para bellum !!”

Since: Dec 07

Southeast Virginia

#6015 Aug 28, 2013
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
to see evidence of successful in-person voter fraud, because any time I've researched it I find nothing consequential.
If it was successful, how would you know about the fraud? Here are a few links about those who had been caught:

http://www.southernminn.com/faribault_daily_n...
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/voter-fra...
http://watchdog.org/101150/election-watchdog-...

And there was the story that went national this past election of a woman from Ohio(?) that freely admitted on the news to voting SIX TIMES for Obama and thought she was completely justified in doing so.

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#6016 Aug 28, 2013
Armed Veteran wrote:
<quoted text>
If it was successful, how would you know about the fraud? Here are a few links about those who had been caught:
http://www.southernminn.com/faribault_daily_n...
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/voter-fra...
http://watchdog.org/101150/election-watchdog-...
And there was the story that went national this past election of a woman from Ohio(?) that freely admitted on the news to voting SIX TIMES for Obama and thought she was completely justified in doing so.
So no election outcomes were changed and the people were caught, indicating that the existing system works.

So what's the rationale for new restrictions that have been shown will disenfranchise millions of Americans? It's a solution in search of a problem

Unless you think it's a problem that so many poor and minorities vote.

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#6017 Aug 28, 2013
FormerParatrooper wrote:
<quoted text>
Enforcement of current laws, and earlier I have posted about mental health and the lack of help for people( we closed the mental hospitals that kept the insane of the street), prison reform, keeping repeat violent offenders in prison and immigration enforcement. Those are some ideas I have brought to the table.
I don't buy that older people don't have ID, they have likely driven a vehicle, cashed a check and done other things that ID is required for. The young, drivers licenses? Or at least a State ID for buying beer or cigs. The poor? Do they receive assistance? They need ID for that. I do not know of a State that would not issue an I'D for those who cannot truely afford one.
The percentage that wouldn't "bother" voting would cross the political sprectrum, not just Democrats.
I phrased it that way intentionally. It was a comparison to your statement that only some actual fraud occurs in the vote.
Older people who don't drive no longer have drivers licenses. They may have ID, but in PA it's estimated that 15% of the elderly don't have the newly required ID to vote. Cashing checks, buying alcohol and cigarettes, receiving governemnt assistance - all those things do not require the specific government issued photo ID that these new laws require.

When additional hurdles are put up the disproportionately impact Democratic voters, then more Democratic voters will not go to the polls.

You do know that the State of PA admitted in court that they don't know of any instances of in-person voter fraud in the state, right? And that Mike Turzai, the PA GOP House majority leader said, "Voter ID, which is going to allow Governor Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania, done."

So you think that zero elections being impacted by in-person voting fraud is the same as 32,000 dead Americans? I'm sorry, but I couldn't disagree more.

“Si vis pacem, para bellum !!”

Since: Dec 07

Southeast Virginia

#6019 Aug 28, 2013
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
So no election outcomes were changed and the people were caught, indicating that the existing system works.
So what's the rationale for new restrictions that have been shown will disenfranchise millions of Americans? It's a solution in search of a problem
Unless you think it's a problem that so many poor and minorities vote.
And your claim of disenfranchising is proven by what???(something in your post is starting to stink)

It's funny how those you claim to be disenfranchised by voter ID laws have no problem coming up with an ID when they need a handout from the govt isn't it???

“Si vis pacem, para bellum !!”

Since: Dec 07

Southeast Virginia

#6021 Aug 28, 2013
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
So no election outcomes were changed and the people were caught, indicating that the existing system works.
So what's the rationale for new restrictions that have been shown will disenfranchise millions of Americans? It's a solution in search of a problem
Unless you think it's a problem that so many poor and minorities vote.
So by your logic, since 1.5 million people have been kept from buying a firearm from a dealer by the NICS background checks, no further legislation should be needed since the system is working.....right??? Especially since further gun control legislation will only serve to disenfranchise law-abiding gun owners.

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#6022 Aug 28, 2013
Voting Law Changes in 2012

These new restrictions fall most heavily on young, minority, and low-income voters, as well as on voters with disabilities. This wave of changes may sharply tilt the political terrain for the 2012 election. Based on the Brennan Center’s analysis of the 19 laws and two executive actions that passed in 14 states, it is clear that:

- These new laws could make it significantly harder for more than five million eligible voters to cast ballots in 2012.

- The states that have already cut back on voting rights will provide 171 electoral votes in 2012 – 63 percent of the 270 needed to win the presidency.

- Of the 12 likely battleground states, as assessed by an August Los Angeles Times analysis of Gallup polling, five have already cut back on voting rights (and may pass additional restrictive legislation), and two more are currently considering new restrictions.

http://www.brennancenter.org/publication/voti...

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#6023 Aug 28, 2013
Study: New laws restrict voting for 5 million

More than 5 million Americans could find it harder to vote next year under a slew of new voting laws enacted mostly by Republican-controlled legislatures, according to a New York University study out today.

This year, more than a dozen states have passed laws requiring photo identification for voters, curbing early voting or making it harder to conduct voter registration drives. "This is the most significant cutback on voting rights in decades," said Michael Waldman, executive director of the New York University's Brennan Center for Justice, which has challenged new restrictions on voting. "More voters may be affected than the margin of victory in two out of the past three presidential elections."

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/onpol...

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#6024 Aug 28, 2013
State-issued photo ID is not required for food stamps.

----------

SNAP regulations require an applicant to verify his or her identity in order to receive program benefits. A valid State&#8208;issued ID is a common document used to prove an applicant’s identity, but it is not the only acceptable form of proof. SNAP regulations require that local SNAP offices offer applicants flexibility about the type of documents they can provide to verify their information.

A local office is required to accept any document that reasonably establishes the applicant’s identity and cannot accept only one type of verification. Other examples of acceptable documents that verify an applicant’s identity are:
• A birth certificate
• An ID card for health benefits or another assistance program
• A school or work ID card
• Wage stubs containing the applicant’s name

http://www.fns.usda.gov/snap/government/pdf/S...

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#6025 Aug 28, 2013
FormerParatrooper wrote:
Voter fraud in Illinois is well known. I will get links, as I stated before on a mobile device it is difficult to do so.
I found this...

----------

Report: Voter fraud not a big problem in Illinois

According to News21, a national investigative reporting project funded by the Carnegie Corp. and the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation, of the 23 voter fraud cases logged in Illinois over the past 12 years, none has been related to someone impersonating someone else at the polls.

http://qctimes.com/news/state-and-regional/il...

----------

And of course there are stories about voter REGISTRATION fraud, a different subject than in-person voter fraud.

Have you found the articles you referenced?

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#6026 Aug 28, 2013
Armed Veteran wrote:
<quoted text>
So by your logic, since 1.5 million people have been kept from buying a firearm from a dealer by the NICS background checks, no further legislation should be needed since the system is working.....right??? Especially since further gun control legislation will only serve to disenfranchise law-abiding gun owners.
There is absolutely no logic in your post. It's like you think that because 1.5 million illegal gun sales were prevented by background checks (which don't prevent law abiding citizens from buying guns), then millions of Americans being disenfranchised by voter ID laws is okay.

You're not using MY logic with that argument. You aren't using any logic at all.

“Si vis pacem, para bellum !!”

Since: Dec 07

Southeast Virginia

#6027 Aug 28, 2013
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
State-issued photo ID is not required for food stamps.
----------
SNAP regulations require an applicant to verify his or her identity in order to receive program benefits. A valid State&#8208;issued ID is a common document used to prove an applicant’s identity, but it is not the only acceptable form of proof. SNAP regulations require that local SNAP offices offer applicants flexibility about the type of documents they can provide to verify their information.
A local office is required to accept any document that reasonably establishes the applicant’s identity and cannot accept only one type of verification. Other examples of acceptable documents that verify an applicant’s identity are:
• A birth certificate
• An ID card for health benefits or another assistance program
• A school or work ID card
• Wage stubs containing the applicant’s name
http://www.fns.usda.gov/snap/government/pdf/S...
Birth Certificate: can be used to obtain a state issued ID at the nearest DMV;
Health or other assistance program: usually need an ID and social security card to apply for;
Wage stubs: usually need an ID or social security card to get a job.

Hell....my son just got his learner's permit last week in which he had to produce his social security card and birth certificate for.

Sorry, but there is absolutely NO EXCUSE why someone can't get a state issued ID in this country, and to claim a hardship in doing so is a BULLSHIT argument.

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#6028 Aug 28, 2013
Armed Veteran wrote:
<quoted text>
Birth Certificate: can be used to obtain a state issued ID at the nearest DMV;
Health or other assistance program: usually need an ID and social security card to apply for;
Wage stubs: usually need an ID or social security card to get a job.
Hell....my son just got his learner's permit last week in which he had to produce his social security card and birth certificate for.
Sorry, but there is absolutely NO EXCUSE why someone can't get a state issued ID in this country, and to claim a hardship in doing so is a BULLSHIT argument.
The question remains - why create this additional hurdle to voting when the system is working the way it is and there is zero evidence that voter fraud is a problem?

There is no reason except to make it harder for people to vote.

CERTAIN people.

“HUNTING RIGHTS ADVOCATE”

Since: Oct 08

Boggy Creek

#6029 Aug 28, 2013
Leave it to Danny Boy to avoid the tough questions and spam away instead.

“Si vis pacem, para bellum !!”

Since: Dec 07

Southeast Virginia

#6030 Aug 28, 2013
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
The question remains - why create this additional hurdle to voting when the system is working the way it is and there is zero evidence that voter fraud is a problem?
There is no reason except to make it harder for people to vote.
CERTAIN people.
Why create additional requirements in order to buy a firearm when the system in place now has already blocked 1.5 million people from buying a firearm? With a murder-by-firearm percentage of 0.0078%(approx. 110,250,000 gun owners (35% of population) and 8,583 firearm related murders (FBI-2011)), it seems like the current system is doing pretty damn good.

“Si vis pacem, para bellum !!”

Since: Dec 07

Southeast Virginia

#6031 Aug 28, 2013
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
The question remains - why create this additional hurdle to voting when the system is working the way it is and there is zero evidence that voter fraud is a problem?
There is no reason except to make it harder for people to vote.
CERTAIN people.
So voter fraud is OK as long as it doesn't cause a problem (swing an election)? Are you f-ing serious???

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#6032 Aug 28, 2013
Armed Veteran wrote:
<quoted text>
Why create additional requirements in order to buy a firearm when the system in place now has already blocked 1.5 million people from buying a firearm?
Ummm, because 32,000 of your fellow Americans are still killed with guns every year. I know you're fine with that number, but most people aren't.

And how many political candidates are denied elected office because of in-person voter fraud? ZERO.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

US Secret Service Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Street Artist SABO Blasts Lena Dunham, Bill Cli... Dec 8 Anonymous 1
Guard fired after Obama visit: I'm not a convict Nov '14 SirPrize 6
Gainer Mooted as Next Secret Service Director Nov '14 Le Jimbo 25
Police: Obama faced threats during Indiana visit Oct '14 nightcruiser49 1
Secret Service director faces grilling over sec... Oct '14 Mr Johnson 139
Another Secret Service SNAFU: Fake congressman ... Oct '14 Bama Yankee 1
Secret Service Director Julia Pierson resigns a... Oct '14 inbred Genius 24