Every time the subject of providing proof of citizenship using some sort of photo identification prior to registering to vote arises, advocates against such a requirement protest that requiring photo ID is an invasion of privacy and/or is discriminatory to non-English speaking peoples, the elderly, those living in rural areas, students and any other group they can construe as being an oppressed minority. It is interesting that these are the same advocates that insist on photo ID, back ground investigations and waiting periods for anyone desiring to purchase firearms. In many of these same states a person can vote on the same day he registers without any investigation or proof of citizenship. Which “discriminatory” action is more deleterious to the nation and to our liberty? A: Allowing non-citizens to influence and direct our country’s political policies and elections or B; allowing citizens to arm themselves with firearms… I submit that voting requirements should be seen in the same light as purchasing firearms. Both topics should be handled identically. Either do away with proof of citizenship and back ground checks for the purchase of firearms or make voting as important as firearms ownership. Is one less important than the other?
