Judge Upholds Ban On Voters Taking Selfies Of Ballot

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
No one wants to see your selfie. Period. So it just seems reasonable that no one wants to see a selfie of you with your ballot. In fact, I'd like to see a ban on duck-face, lip-pouting selfies altogether (ballot or no ballot).

Alsup claimed the ACLU was trying to run a "2-minute drill." The judge said he couldn't imagine changing a longstanding law. A law, he said, that could lead to retraining hundreds of workers at more than 14,000 poling places across California's 58 counties. He also couldn't imagine how it would affect thousands of voters facing critical decisions by not being able to use a "selfie stick" with their phone to show others who they voted for.
 
To be fair, the ban is only in place to prevent people from showing who they voted for in case of voter fraud. Though at the same time, I'm conflicted on this as the ban completely violates our 1st amendment rights. Nothing is as contradictory as "America is the freest nation in the world, look at our open and free (unless you vote in the dem primary) voting process, just don't take any pictures of you actually engaging and celebrating in this privilege you should be so thankful for, we don't want you to have THAT much freedom".
 
Some places you are not allowed to take pictures, fucking deal with it. It is not a freedom of speech violation because you can't take a picture
 
How about this: If the voting device is acting up, take a video of it. No judge or prosecutor would press charging for filming evidence of a voting machine malfunctioning or voter fraud.

These laws are in place so no one can legally compel you to reveal your vote to anyone else.

Imagine if some scumbag company handed out bonuses if their employees proved via a video that they voted for a particular candidate.

Also, these laws make contracts stipulating you vote for a particular person, essentially, void because you can't legally prove it one way or another.

"1% APR mortgage with evidence of a Clinton Vote"

I'm all for free speech, but there are a few, limited circumstances where it behooves us to have some restrictions... And yes, you CAN yell "fire" in a movie theater, despite what people think is common knowledge that you can't.
 
Lets not blame the whole country for one of California's silly laws now...Remember, California is the state that causes the most cancer.
 
Bandalo said:
Lets not blame the whole country for one of California's silly laws now...Remember, California is the state that causes the most cancer.
Click to expand...

A good number of states have these laws. The main reason they exist is to prevent people from using pictures of completed ballots as proof they voted for someone, either as a result of vote selling or intimidation.

ballot-selfies_moun.jpg
 
Chunder said:
To be fair, the ban is only in place to prevent people from showing who they voted for in case of voter fraud. Though at the same time, I'm conflicted on this as the ban completely violates our 1st amendment rights. Nothing is as contradictory as "America is the freest nation in the world, look at our open and free (unless you vote in the dem primary) voting process, just don't take any pictures of you actually engaging and celebrating in this privilege you should be so thankful for, we don't want you to have THAT much freedom".
Click to expand...
Quite simply there's a stack. All rights are in conflict at some point. I don't have freedom of motion to stoll into your home. Not fucking up the mechanics of the voting process at the last second is worth some weight in temporarily blocking this until it can be hashed out.

Worst case scenario, what if your employer wants you to publish your vote so they know you voted the correct way? You violate the anonymous aspect and it becomes an easy vector for abuse. In other words, we should take people's words for how they voted and you should have to suck it otherwise. There should be no easy mechanism which can be turned into a form of coersion. Even and especially if that is peer pressure or a bitchy spouse.
 
damicatz said:
A good number of states have these laws. The main reason they exist is to prevent people from using pictures of completed ballots as proof they voted for someone, either as a result of vote selling or intimidation.
Click to expand...

I agree, there's reasons for and against such laws. I'm against selfies in general, so I don't think I can make an impartial judgement on this one.
 
Society as a whole does not fucking need to have the right to snap a pic any fucking place that someone decides "HEY CHECK ME OUT..." or words to that effect.

SERIOUSLY PEOPLE, WE DON'T GIVE A SHIT. :D
 
Where does the anger toward selfies come from? I honestly have no idea. I do agree that doing whatever they can to maintain voter anonymity is the most important, you seriously would see pizza places giving free pizzas out for showing you voting for a certain person.
 
Can't we just exterminate all people taking selfies, can only be an improvement on the gene pool.
 
Darunion said:
Where does the anger toward selfies come from? I honestly have no idea.
Click to expand...
Honestly? It's all the inane ones that have absolutely flooded our senses that we have an instant knee jerk backlash against all of them. Blame the Kim Kardashians, the Paris Hiltons, or any other vapid people (usually women and that's not a misogynistic statement), but take a picture of yourself on top of a mountain you da man! (or woman), take a picture of you finishing an ironman triathlon? rock it! take a picture of your creation of a 19 layer BLT sandwich? See you in the ER but you are my hero! take a picture of you having jumped a security fence so you can be right next to a polar bear? I hope that bear fucking mauls you, post a picture of your cup o' noodles that you added an egg to? whoopity do! post a picture of your voting ballot? who the fuck cares.

It's the internet, and people still have not gotten it that the world does not give a fuck about your everyday shit.
 
umeng2002 said:
Imagine if some scumbag company handed out bonuses if their employees proved via a video that they voted for a particular candidate.
Click to expand...

Those scumbag companies have names. Usually ends with employees paying dues and the word Union.
 
I like the duck face look Steve. It's so freaking sexy on thin girls!
 
Some theme parks have banned selfie sticks due to people injuring themselves using a selfie stick. I say let 'em, cleanses the gene pool.
 
William Alsup is, by a super long way, the best judge currently working in the entire country. He's always less worried about the letter of the law than by the practical consequences and worst-case-scenarios of his decisions.
 
Why don't people take a selfie outside the door with a "vote here" sign before and after?

Selfies should be banned but if people could do it in a smart way...

Nevermind. Most people are not smart.

I know! Let's have designated "selfie areas" just like designated smoking areas.
 
I still have a pic of my '08 ballot of Obama vs. McCain where I wrote in Bugs Bunny. Back before taking pics of ballots was illegal in my state. It wasn't a selfie though.
 
Wolfkin said:
Can't we just exterminate all people taking selfies, can only be an improvement on the gene pool.
Click to expand...

Frankly, the uncontrollable desire to showcase oneself doing easily achievable and utterly mundane activities should be a sign of clinical mental illness.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top