We can certainly use hypotheticals to test laws. Unfortunately, your test involves a gain that can be measured in monetary value. A vote is not equivalent to a flat screen tv or a food voucher.
Really? You start offering a chance to win free TV's to dem voters if they show up to vote with their ID's and see if your ilk show up in greater numbers. Many of your ilk agree with me. I offer up the article below as a little reminder. You think that was to get out the Dem vote or the Republican vote. Just sayin. https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Lates...-may-turn-voting-ballots-into-lottery-tickets
Well if votes were used for a lottery then they would be a thing of monetary value. In the here and now votes are not and your argument doesn’t equate.
My argument there was that even your own lefty ilk agree that something of monetary value would get out more votes. Keep crabwalking sideways. You will find the ocean someday. OR NOT.
If someone does not value their vote enough to obtain a ID that is their choice. Their choice should not prevent us from ensuring only eligible american's vote. Should Mexico and Canada allow me to vote without ID?
It is not illegal, only illegal if the person you sold to happens to be guilty of those offenses. I can sell privately to a saint without id requirement and not break the law.
You apparently did not read this post of mine. Or this one. Perhaps you can before you rehash the exact same thing over again? Or maybe you avoided them because they contain questions you don't want to answer? A quote from a politician is not a statistical source.
As I already said, it is against the law if you sell to someone who is a felon, someone who has restraining orders taken against them, someone who has been diagnosed with mental impairment, someone who is underage, or someone who has intent to use the firearm unlawfully. As I also already said, unless you know the person really well, you cannot know any of this without doing a background check. Lastly, as I already said, does it still get done? Yes, on occasion. And sometimes people sell pharmaceuticals without checking ID, or alcohol without confirming the age of the buyer, etc. This "loophole" should be immediately closed (I said this, too). ID should be required on every purchase of a firearm, no matter how the transaction is conducted. Additionally, ID should be required for every person that votes. As a 2A supporter, I support requiring IDs on all gun transactions. So tell me why, again, this has anything to do with your argument regarding why ID should not be required to vote. Also, please answer the following, which you conveniently ignored:
Do you not see the circular logic here? It's illegal to sell to someone ineligible so people shouldn't do it. Guess what, it's also illegal to vote if ineligible, so people shouldn't do it. It's the whole "why take my gun rights away if criminals will commit crime anyway?" argument. So why take someone's voting rights away if someone's going to vote illegally anyway? As to your second goal post, I ignored it because it's a non-sequitur. It doesn't matter what the "liberals" want to make a right (health care, housing, etc...), the fact is they are not until amended into the books. Voting is already a right, so you can't conflate it with privileges (as I already stated yet you chose to ignore).
Your argument is convoluted.... Do you believe in checking someone's eligibility to buy a gun or not? Checking eligibility is not taking away a right to vote. It is proving eligibility. In fact if you are not checking eligibility you are taking away the value of my vote.