Both the right to vote and the right to keep and bear arms are preserved in the United States Constitution. Few dispute this and no one who has actually read the constitution does.
However, there’s a curious double standard coming from the left when it comes to things like photo IDs.
First, let’s talk about them with regard to voting.
In a number of states, there’s a requirement that voters show a photo ID to prove they’re actually the person registered to vote.
These measures are surprisingly controversial, however.
Why? Because many on the left argue that poorer folks, particularly minorities, have a difficult time obtaining photo IDs. They any number of reasons such as travel difficulties getting to whoever issues IDs, time off from work to get one, and a number of other factors.
Regardless, though, they don’t think you should have to show a photo ID in order to exercise your right vote.
Yet find me the opponents of voter ID requirements who oppose having to show an ID to purchase a firearm. I’d really like to meet those folks. After all, even if I disagree with them, I respect consistency.
Meanwhile, gun rights supporters might be annoyed at having to show an ID to buy a gun, we kind of shrug at it and don’t lose much sleep over the requirement.
But these same people who are so concerned about poor folks not being able to get an ID–despite needing one for a thousand other things and actually being able to provide it for those other things–think nothing of not just photo ID requirements for guns but also adding more and more costs to the equation if you want to actually bear your arms.
In Illinois, a carry permit costs an additional $150 plus a credit card transaction fee. That’s in addition to the fees for the 16-hour training course required.
So that’s two full days sitting in a course in order to exercise your right.
In other states, the challenges are greater. For example, in Nebraska, you don’t just run down to the local state police barracks and get fingerprinted. There are only a handful of places authorized to conduct those kinds of fingerprinting, and they’re spread out.
And training? While it’s only 8 hours, you may have to travel hours just to get to a class.
So in addition to the cost of the permit and the training, you also have lost time from work money spent on gas.
My question is why is all of this acceptable to require before exercising a constitutionally protected right while asking for a simple state-issued ID that they’ll give for free isn’t?
The reason is that none of these people view the Second Amendment as a right. They may pay lip service to the idea that it is, but they don’t really believe it. If they really saw it as a right, they’d treat it like a right and try to remove barriers to exercising it, not erect more of them.
If voting is so important that we should allow anyone to do it based on nothing but their word they are who they say they are, why should we have to jump through so many hoops just to carry a gun?
And I didn’t even get into all the requirements in places that require a permit to purchase a firearm, which is actually worse than carry permit requirements.
Then again, I don’t really expect ideological consistency from the same people who scream about multiculturalism and how important it is to appreciate other cultures while also screaming about cultural appropriation.