eBay'er Arrested For Attempting To Sell His Vote 501
The Associated Press reports that Max P. Sanders, 19, is charged with a felony for attempting to auction off his vote on eBay for the upcoming presidential election. From the article: '"Fundamentally, we believe it is wrong to sell your vote," said John Aiken, a spokesman for the office. "There are people that have died for this country for our right to vote, and to take something that lightly, to say, 'I can be bought... It's a real shame"' Yes, that is a terrible shame, isn't it. Perhaps we should arrest, prosecute, and imprison everyone who sells their vote. The boy says it was all a joke, but prosecutors aren't laughing. Max faces up to 5 years in prison and $10,000 in fines if he is convicted.
You can't transfer a 'vote' (Score:5, Insightful)
The elections are anonymous.
I could sell my vote for a million dollars, and still vote however I liked, and you would be none the wiser.
Re:You can't transfer a 'vote' (Score:5, Interesting)
Worse than just selling your vote, this can be used for voter coercion.
Some people think paper is just the perfect solution for voting, but really it has many problems that can be solved by electronic voting when done carefully. (And of course, when done haphazardly electronic voting has many problems that paper voting does not).
Re:You can't transfer a 'vote' (Score:5, Insightful)
I would sell my vote, but Diebold already sold it for me.
Re:You can't transfer a 'vote' (Score:5, Interesting)
Beware -- the beast now wears a new skin. They now call themselves "Premier Election Solutions", or PES. Unfortunately, this name change is likely enough to convince the unwashed masses that they're not one and the same.
What's sad is that if you sell your vote, you go to jail, but if you buy a politician, you get to play golf with the judges.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
speaking of judges, it's a bit surprising we haven't seen any group take a politician to court over their sudden reversal of vote after receiving a large contribution. (bribe)
Re:You can't transfer a 'vote' (Score:5, Interesting)
Voters choose one list from among hundreds of options available and put it into an envelope with no identifying information
Ballots are opened in front of representatives of every party, the table head lifts every vote so representatives from each party can verify that the vote was cast, and it is entered (in 2000 it was manually, but these days it's electronic I think).)
Hypothetical vote buyers would have to buy the table heads in every subdivision, and make sure representatives from the other parties don't notice any strange behaviour from the table head (looking for scrathes, marks or whatever identificatory information was included.) (And ours is not a 2-party system, and even the majority party is made up of dozens of smaller parties which I expect would not all be involved in the collusion)
But the particular pattern voting example could not happen under our system.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes, since we are all brainless vegetables who do whatever the advertising tells us to do.
Yes, since advertising something is morally equivalent to pointing a gun at someone and making them do something.
Yes, since advertising is... Oh for crying out loud. No.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Well maybe they'll actually get him on fraud charges, as he wouldn't be able to prove his vote to the potential buyer.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Silly kid... All Americans know that only politicians votes are for sale. Not your own.... :)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
According to the courts, people can swap their votes so there's a double standard here. If the vote is only supposed to be yours or if it is available as barter for whatever service you see fit, even anothers vote, it is saleable.
http://www.aclu.org/votingrights/gen/32427prs20070806.html [aclu.org]
Seems as if it is your right to vote, or not, you should be able to do what you want with it without the courts interference, if it is your wish. OR it should be required that each vote actually matter and be so respected th
I wouldn't have backed down. (Score:5, Insightful)
I'd have taken advantage of it, called in the media, and explained to them just how common "selling your vote" is in congress, and how there is nobody who truly represents "we the people", especially that portion of us below 30.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think that this is flamebait. I think it's brilliant. This isn't what the guy was going for but it would definitely make the people look at people in congress being bought by lobiests. They should be arrested too, otherwise this is not the country that they kids are dying for. I don't think that the current congress represents any individual not just the people under 30.
I wouldn't have sold it as a joke but more as a protest to the government. But I'm neither that ballsy/stupid or a U.S. citize
Re:I wouldn't have backed down. (Score:5, Insightful)
Selling a vote for a certain law or policy in congress is entirely different then selling a vote for an election.
You're right. One is 1/350 odd millionth of the popular vote, the other has direct, harmful impact on the public.
And you have no proof that congress men actually sold their votes. People donate to candidates who support issues they care about. It is entirely possible that the vote was completely separate from the campaign donations.
In the words of every valley girl "oh please". Please do sit and spin some more on this.
I could go on about problems with your concept of "we the people" with your notion of that in relation to the population under thirty and the decline of the education system but I will save that for another time.
Ah yes, let's turn around and bash the citizenry when they engage in civil disobedience and stay home because they know nobody gives a damn.
Re:I wouldn't have backed down. (Score:5, Informative)
Well, except most people don't vote, only about 120 million votes were cast in the 04 US election.
Re:I wouldn't have backed down. (Score:4, Insightful)
Strawman argumentation.
13% of black males being unable to vote is a symptom, not the disease.
The disease is disenfranchisement of felons, which opens for felony convictions being used for political purposes. Increasing the felony conviction of the opposition becomes a political goal. Modern democracies have the right to vote as an inalienable right, just because of this.
Also, what was wrong 30 years ago may not be as wrong today. Someone who has served his sentence for what was wrong back then should not be punished for it today, when it might not even be a felony anymore (sodomy being one example -- there are many others, so please don't pick this out for a strawman treatment). Having anything but the death penalty and lifelong imprisonment becomes a farce when you can continue to punish people after the sentence has been served.
Re:I wouldn't have backed down. (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
it is civil disobedience to break the minnesota law, and do ignore the numerous laws people from 9 to 30 ignore every day in order to maintain the same functional freedom their forefathers had.
Re:I wouldn't have backed down. (Score:5, Insightful)
in time, bartering will become illegal as it somehow subverts the exchange of 'value' and can be seen as a form of evasion.
I'm pretty sure of this, unless people stand the F*** up.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:I wouldn't have backed down. (Score:5, Funny)
I think your vote is like your pussy:
It's perfectly legal to give it away for free, but the moment you try to earn some cash...
Re:I wouldn't have backed down. (Score:5, Funny)
Oh I see! Not being American I was unaware of this loop hole!
So how come this guy didn't just trade his vote for dinner and a show?
Re:I wouldn't have backed down. (Score:5, Interesting)
I live in Alaska. Nearly every elected official is under investigation by the FBI. Our only congressman is the one that proposed one of the bridges to nowhere. The closest street to the bridge landing was Don Young Way. Did you guess that his name was Don Young? He has a lot of land there, and so do his friends. The bridge to nowhere was supposed to make him and his friens lots of money in real estate investing. Oh, and he sponsored a bill for construction in Florida. Why is the Alaskan representative proposing things for Florida? Perhaps it was the large contribution from someone that would benefit materially from that construction. This is under investigation. Senator Ted Stevens and his son, state senator Ben Stevens are under investigation for accepting bribes as well. And the former governor. And lots of others in the state legislature. Votes are bought all the time. One company, known for being a conservative haven (bought out the "conservative" local paper when it folded to continue the conservative rants in the editorials) was bought out because the owner and his friends/associates were indicted for bribery.
IT happens all the time. You have to do it for 20+ years straight until you are giving people large items for free on a regular basis and not thinking anything of it until the FBI gets involved. But they do get involved. And I know for a fact they are investigating one vote-selling senator and representative. Those are the people representing me. Well, claiming to, but they really only represent friends and donors. That's legal, as long as you disclose the income. But they didn't even bother with that. I'm sure once the FBI is done, whatever they find, the IRS will continue from there.
Re:I wouldn't have backed down. (Score:5, Funny)
Why the Hell do people spell it Amerika? Is it because of Rammstein, or is it because we just want it to sound German and oppressive (which... is pretty much Rammstein, but still)?
Re:I wouldn't have backed down. (Score:5, Interesting)
Close, but no zigar.
"Amerika" is a pre-WWII novelette by Franz Kafka, about a European immigrant to the US who finds the country and people in it quite different from his expectations, for better and for worse.
The term "Amerika" as a political slur was based on this book, but has since then been misunderstood by the great unwashed masses to think there's a German Polizei-like twist to it. So if anyone uses "Amerika" and it's obvious from the context that they mean the latter, they tell a lot more about themselves than America.
"Amerika" is, of course, also often used by people who don't have English as their first language, and where "Amerika" is the correct (for them) way of spelling it. A Dane writing "Amerika" is no more wrong than an American writing "Denmark" instead of "Danmark".
That is really funny (Score:5, Insightful)
So does that mean that all the professional lobbiest are going to be arrested for trying to buy votes?
Re:That is really funny (Score:4, Insightful)
The moderation on this board is pathetic. It all seems to be based on whether the mods agree or disagree with the poster, regardless of the freshness of viewpoint or strength of the arguments.
And it's quite clear what viewpoint the mods as a group agree with.
+5, insightful for OP? You gotta be kidding.
Excessive? (Score:5, Insightful)
I can see how this sort of thing would be illegal, but at the same time it's not as if he's really hurting anyone or causing a huge halt to progress. It just seems like it would be a waste throw him in prison for five years over something like this.
Re:Excessive? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
One should note that there is an automatic disqualification for most employment (and voting, ironically enough).
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
"If he is found guilty. He is innocent until proven otherwise*."
*Some restrictions apply. Offer prohibited in some countries. If you are declared a terrorist or enemy combatant or someone in the executive just doesn't like you or on any of the hidden lists various departments have come up with the statement may not apply to you. If you are ineligible, you will be guilty until proven innocent which may take many years since you have no legal recourse to challenge your case.
~X~
Re:Excessive? (Score:5, Insightful)
One should note that there is an automatic disqualification for most employment (and voting, ironically enough).
and when exactly will this be properly challenged and struck down?
if they're so keen on protecting our voting rights, then they shouldn't be able to silence people by putting a microscope to them and digging up some common everyday activity which happens to be a felony.
What better way to silence critics of your anti-drug policy than slapping everyone who smokes marijuana with a felony charge?
When last I checked, the constitution said nothing about smoking weed or snorting coke when they outlined the right to vote.
Re:Excessive? (Score:5, Insightful)
What better way to silence critics of your anti-drug policy than slapping everyone who smokes marijuana with a felony charge?
What better way to silence critics of your anti-theft policy than slapping everyone who steals with a felony charge?
What better way to silence critics of your anti-murder policy than slapping everyone who murders with a felony charge?
What better way to silence critics of your anti-speeding policy than slapping everyone who speeds with a felony charge?
What better way to silence critics of your anti-x policy than slapping everyone who x-es with a felony charge?
This isn't some conspiracy to disenfranchise and silence druggies. Using Schedule I drugs is a felony, and has been since Nixon's time. This isn't "putting a microsocope to them and digging up some conmon everyday activity which happens to be a felony" - this is something that is illegal for which you were convicted by a jury of your peers.
Can any reader come up with a "common everyday activity" which just happens to be a felony? I can't, and I'm just fine with disenfranchising cokeheads.
Re:Excessive? (Score:5, Insightful)
What better way to silence critics of your anti-drug policy than slapping everyone who smokes marijuana with a felony charge?
What better way to silence critics of your anti-theft policy than slapping everyone who steals with a felony charge?
What better way to silence critics of your anti-murder policy than slapping everyone who murders with a felony charge?
What better way to silence critics of your anti-speeding policy than slapping everyone who speeds with a felony charge?
What better way to silence critics of your anti-x policy than slapping everyone who x-es with a felony charge?
This isn't some conspiracy to disenfranchise *snip*
i'm sorry but it is. There is nothing inherently immoral about doing marijuana vs tobacco, there is nothing inherently immoral about speeding, and i'm sorry you can't compare victimless crimes like drugs and speeding to the active denial of a person's fundamental right to live. This is nothing more than extremist "law = morality" frothing.
Can any reader come up with a "common everyday activity" which just happens to be a felony? I can't,
filesharing - the net act
liquor sales - the volstead actmarijuana/lsd use - the nixon drug laws (i'm so sorry to tell you, but, even though I don't do this personally, it is an everyday activity for millions, and there is no proven addictive properties to either. people who use these drugs are not "Evil")
and I'm just fine with disenfranchising cokeheads.
Ah, so your subjective morality and insistence you have the authority to make the decisions for others has more merit than people like me, who think coke heads should have a right to buy coke if they want to. It's their body.
Of course, simply slap a felony on any of these charges and suddenly they no longer have a voice. Fascists like you have silenced them. I'm sorry but there is no more accurate term to someone who believes they should be able to gag anyone who doesn't agree with them.
Re:Excessive? (Score:5, Insightful)
Why shouldn't someone who had a 5 year felony conviction 30 years ago, served their time, reformed, got a job, and never did anything illegal ever again... never have the right to vote again?
Hypothetically speaking, what if the felony was committed in protest against an unjust law or corrupt political system? What if the felony was only a felony because corrupt politicians signed it to law? Shouldn't participation in the political process be an inviolable right, on par with freedom of speech or assembly?
Re:Excessive? (Score:5, Insightful)
This is very very very simple and it frightens me that you don't understand the problem. The people that get voted for are the ones who determine what constitutes a felony. The people being voted for effectively get to pick who votes. How in the fucking hell is that not a tremendous conflict of interests?! I hate to be the one to point this out to you, but the Declaration of Independence was fucking treason! The idea that you should prevent a criminal from voting based on his status as a criminal seems pretty fucking counter to the whole purpose here given that that very government was built by criminals. I wish I remember the specifics of the letter, but it is displayed proudly (for now) with the Declaration of Independence. "If we do not hang together in this endeavor we shall surely hang separately."
Re:Excessive? (Score:5, Informative)
Sorry, but you're wrong. Marijuana is a schedule 1 drug according to the DEA: http://www.usdoj.gov/dea/pubs/scheduling.html [usdoj.gov] . Perhaps you meant to say that it's utterly absurd that a drug like marijuana is in the worst schedule of drugs, despite the fact that marijuana is less addictive than alcohol, and has caused zero confirmed deaths since the dawn of history, compared to thousands of fatalities per year for aspirin overdoses. http://www.drugwarfacts.org/causes.htm [drugwarfacts.org]
But you're right, smoking isn't a felony. Smoking usually requires possession, though, which is a misdemeanor or felony depending both on the amount and on the presence or absence of an elusive quality called "intent to distribute". Sadly, police officers have been caught planting this evidence on innocent people:
http://wcbstv.com/local/Undercover.NYPD.Officers.2.759420.html [wcbstv.com]
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4176/is_20070427/ai_n19063646 [findarticles.com]
Re: (Score:2)
They will probably throw the book at him because of the BS vote trading to help Gore in 2000. The ACLU filed suit (well helped) and won in the 9th circuit on appeals which said something along the lines of the vote trading sites as well as the mechanisms being protected speech.
MN has had this law for a long time (1893 I think) but I can see it being used to scare people who might participate in a vote scam and making an example of this kid is just the tool to do it.
hmmm (Score:5, Insightful)
then ..... lobbying should be outlawed
Cue congressman/senator examples in 3, 2, 1 (Score:5, Insightful)
so, its ok if sale of a vote is made under other names, like 'donations', or 'lobbying', or 'support', but its not ok if it is named directly for what it is.
you gotta love the hypocrisy that is reigning on this world.
dont think so (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
What oath has the congressmen taken that describes anything of the sort?
Lety's see:
I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.
The part about faithfully discharging the duties of the office comes to mind. Bearing true faith and allegiance to the Constitution also comes to mind.
Walk down the street, pull a gun on someone and say "I'm going to kill you" while emphasizing the KILLL part.
For one, there's a considerable difference between an imminent threat to life (which if at all credible is in and of itself harmful) and the threat to perform some non-violent act at some time months in the future.
Try walking down the street and say aloud, "I think I'll cheat on my taxes this year!" and see how much the cops don't care. I'll up the
Cut out the middlemen (Score:5, Funny)
This guy just wants to cut out the middlemen.
If only he had made PayPal a payment option... (Score:5, Funny)
feedback... (Score:5, Funny)
A+++++++++++++ would vote again!
Free speech? Thought police? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
I think that the individual has the right to decide whether it's more important for him to gain a few dollars versus influencing which party wins.
Re:Free speech? Thought police? (Score:5, Insightful)
I think that the individual has the right to decide whether it's more important for him to gain a few dollars versus influencing which party wins.
Sometimes individual rights collide with the collective interest. When you choose to live in a country with a government, you give up some individual rights -- in exchange you get safety for your person. The old Icelandic Republic allowed the selling and buying of votes; within a few hundred years four families had cornered the market and civil war was the inevitable result. New democracies like the US don't allow the buying and selling of votes for a good reason. As a civilization, we learn from the mistakes of the past and try to avoid repeating them.
Re:Free speech? Thought police? (Score:4, Interesting)
Then why do we accept the idea of lobbyists? Are they not as corrupt as the "4 families in Iceland"?
The politicians do not listen to the will of the people, in exception when a side offers lots of handouts. If I recall correctly, the founders said that poor people should not vote because they will vote for whomever gives the biggest handout, which is what we're seeing. After all, the inequity of poverty in the USA indicates that there's more poor than rich, so it'd be the "2 wolves and 1 sheep deciding what to have for supper".
Perhaps Heinlein's idea in Starship Troopers where one can vote after serving in the military is the proper choice. It'd be a "poverty check", intelligence test, and understanding our country all wrapped in one.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
a couple here in Vancouver put their newborn girl up for sale on Craigslist for $10000 a few weeks ago and they were charged. Of course they said it was a joke, but the point is that it is still against the law, just like selling your vote is illegal in the US.
Re:Free speech? Thought police? (Score:5, Insightful)
That is totally true. This is thoughtcrime. No actual crime was committed. We do not know if he actually intended to complete the transaction, or simply highlight the fact that lobbyists buy votes all the time.
Arrested? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Land of the free? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Land of the free? (Score:4, Insightful)
It's your vote. You should be able to do whatever you want to do with your vote. It should be a crime if you did not use your vote at all.
Ummm... I strongly support everyone voting, but what if what someone doesn't want to cast a vote? That's a valid use of their vote as measured by the second sentence of your post, and is in direct contradiction to the third sentence.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
.... but what if what someone doesn't want to cast a vote....
Maybe, if there was a "nobody" and/or a "none of the above" option on every ballot, some of those who now don't vote could express their disgust or disdain with for the candidates on the ballot. As long as money decides who makes it into office and who doesn't for lack of money, a lot of people rightfully feel that voting is a waste of time. To make voting truly worthwhile, money should be taken out of the election system.
On the other hand, maybe
Re: (Score:2)
It's your vote. You should be able to do whatever you want to do with your vote. It should be a crime if you did not use your vote at all.
..and it should be a crime if you did not cast your vote to The Party. Welcome back home, comrade!
Re: (Score:2)
You don't have a vote. You have a right to vote. You can't sell that right any more than you can sell yourself into slavery.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Your last two sentences contradict each other. "Not using it at all" is certainly covered by "do whatever you want", regardless of how you feel about those who don't vote.
My own view is that if I am free to vote, I am necessarily free to not vote; otherwise, voting is as uncoerced as paying tax, and it's but a small step from there to insisting that you must check one of the little boxes. Which raises a question - how does one spoil an electronic ballot? (Or do the voting machines silently convert spoiled "
Re: (Score:2)
Not that it matters much in this election... (Score:3, Insightful)
10 In this election each candidate will pretty much the same thing - there will be subtleties of course, but it reminds me heavily of the futurama episode where the al gore-ish looking twins were battling for presidency of the world - basically agreeing with what each other said.
Re: (Score:2)
Jack Johnson: "Now, I respect my opponent. I think he's a good man. But quite frankly, I agree with everything he just said."
John Jackson: "I say your three cent titanium tax goes too far."
Jack Johnson: "And I say your three cent titanium tax doesn't go too far enough."
George Carlin bit... (Score:2, Offtopic)
One of George Carlin's bits went...
Selling is legal. Fucking is legal. Why isn't selling fucking legal? Why is it illegal to sell something that's perfectly legal to give away?
And whenever I heard that bit, I'd always think about selling votes as a counter argument.
RIP Carlin.
Re: (Score:2)
Two reasons I can think of off the top of my head:
Of course, the first reason completely ignores the fact that it's going to go on
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
How is it adultery if an unmarried woman gets it on with an unmarried man? Oh, right. Fornication. Still, isn't it better to spill your seed in the belly of a whore than on the ground?
After all...
Every sperm is sacred,
every sperm is great.
If a sperm is wasted
God gets quite irate...
GOOD (Score:2)
Democracy is only as good as the law that makes it be respected.
No one should be allowed to sell votes, and noone should be allowed to buy them.
I mean, guys, this is modern democracy 101. America invented the rules. This is a good thing.
Now, had they had the same spirit in bushes questioned election, we would be in a different world now.
THAT is irritating.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Silly kid (Score:4, Funny)
Forget selling, just swap (Score:3, Interesting)
How ironic (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh cry me a river (Score:5, Insightful)
And people have died for your country for your right to freedom. Freedom is also your right to handle your vote you want to. Who are you [John Aiken] to decide how people make up on who they vote.
PS, I'm not an USA citizen, hence the "your".
Re:Oh cry me a river (Score:5, Funny)
Not enough?
Open For Lobbying (Score:5, Insightful)
Sounds more like political theatre than a crime. (Score:5, Insightful)
This sounds like a play by the Secretary of State to win some political points than anything else. Consider the following:
1. No money changed hands.
2. No bids were actually placed.
3. The Secretary of State is an elected official.
4. The SoS office is playing this up big with statements about VFWs and trivializing votes like they caught some big criminal here.
5. The ebayer is some dumb college kid who's either making a statement, or a dumb joke, or both.
As far as the "people died to preserve your right to vote", I'd say those people also died to protect peoples rights of expression. This dumb stunt sounds a lot more like expression than an honest attempt at vote selling and profiteering.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
When things like this pop up and the authorities find out, they HAVE to prosecute. If something like this became systematic, we'd have a real problem on our hands.
Re:Sounds more like political theatre than a crime (Score:4, Insightful)
Yeah, good call.
I was thinking: you only see this kind of frantic throwing-the-book-at-him, in this case well before any crime was actually consummated, if the person is drawing our attention to a dangerous idea. The idea, in this case, might be any of:
Our current social pattern has some spots which, if they became widely known, would cause a collapse. You can tell you've found one when people jump your case just for broaching the subject.
How much different (Score:3, Insightful)
We've got an entire political system built-up around corporations and special interest groups persuading and drafting laws that will directly affect citizens...
If we're going to arrest people, can we start with the Microsofts and the General Motors of the world and then if we have any space left in the prisons, we'll work out what to do with the kids?
How is this different than Lobbying Politicians? (Score:2)
I don't get it, it is 'legal' for Politicians to 'sell' their vote to lobbyists, but a citizen can't do the same.
Yup your vote really counts.... (Score:2)
Children voting? (Score:4, Insightful)
Since when is a 19 year old, of age to vote, considered a "boy"?
Re:Children voting? (Score:5, Insightful)
"Since when is a 19 year old, of age to vote, considered a "boy"?"
You must be under 25.
The Real Travesty. (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm sorry, but my grandfather fought in both Korea and Vietnam, received the Purple Heart, and rose to the rank of Command Sargent Majour. He was also a life long Republican and a staunch Conservative. Old School Conservative, not this 'neo-con' crap.
And my grandfather, one of those men who fought and came close to dying for this right to vote, would find this person's arrest a travesty of what he fought for, because he also fought the that man's right to do whatever he wanted with his vote, include selling it.
Re:The Real Travesty. (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, as a matter of fact, it is. We had many, many long conversations about many things related to his service, including what he fought for, and the many various reason he fought for it. He said he fought for many reasons; because he was ordered to and didn't have a choice, because it was to protect people who couldn't protect themselves. To give people the freedom to choose how they will live their own lives, instead of letting other people force them to live their lives a certain way.
You have the right to vote however you wish to. And while he would think that what this person was doing in selling their vote was sad, he would be happy that he lived in a country where that man had the freedom to do with his vote what he wanted.
Except we apparently don't live in that land.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Your conclusion does not follow. I won't pretend to know your grandfather, but if that is your reasoning, I suggest you think again. You're taking the short view. Following the sale of votes to its conclusion and see if it leads to a country where man has the freedom to do what he wants.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The sale of a vote to the highest bidder is not a path that leads to freedom; nor can it even be called freedom. No man who sells his vote can be said to be a free man nor lay claim to self governance.
Your absurd claim means that we (should) have the freedom to sell ourselves into slavery. Can that even be called freedom? With that "freedom" can we guarantee that all slaves have entered into slavery out of their own free choice?
Don't backpedal and claim this misses the point. You claimed "freedom is...or is
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Yes. I do believe you should be free to do whatever you want with yourself, your body, and your rights, including selling them and giving them away. That's called Freedom.
I would never sell myself into slavery, but if someone wants to do that, then why should they not be allowed to?
There are many things other people do that I think are morally repugnant, or just outright stupid. Yet I do not go about trying to lord my morals over them and force them to stop their actions. They are free to do whatever th
I don't agree with this. (Score:2)
Sure, its wrong to solicit to buy votes, but why cant i offer to sell my vote?
its mine.. I should be able to with it as i please. Isn't that part of freedom?
At least hes trying to get somthing... (Score:4, Insightful)
...out of his vote, instead of throwing it away on a candidate who is trying to BUY his vote with nothing more than empty promises...
Quick! Make an statement about this (Score:3, Interesting)
This is the perfect form of public protest for an slashdotter (you don't have to get away from the computer).
Everybody on the US please! put your vote on sell on ebay, report here (and in wikileaks?) for coordination. When the police come to arrest you and you are in court don't simply say it is a joke, say it is an act of protest at the current election system, point to the people doing the same here.
A judge can ignore the rights of a kid but not a massive protest from the human wave known as /.!
It's called fraud (Score:3, Informative)
It's not that he's selling his vote, it's that as an individual citizen's electoral vote it's pretty much worthless. Now, if it were worth something, such as what lobbyists and industry can offer politicians, instead of being arrested he's be rewarded with, say, being allowed to deduct cost of getting his vote sold from his taxes as a business expense.
Real people can't compete with the artificial people known as corporations because the corporations can mount a tough defense. To do so they'll call on the watch dogs they've already purchased in the form of the existing politicians and laws.
That said "I was only kidding" is a terrible defense that nobody should be expected to believe. If one is to attempt this, it is best done in the form of verifiable protected speech: parody. That requires being able to site specific things one is parodying (web sites, TV ads, etc.).
What about buying votes? (Score:4, Funny)
Maybe a 1st Amendment issue (Score:4, Insightful)
Ugh... this is why District Attorneys drive me crazy (and, as a Public Defender, I deal with them regularly). Using an 1893 law to prosecute a college student... "Fundamentally," as they say, that makes them a bunch of a-holes! If you ever wanted to deal with a group of people who think in binary (on/off, black/white, etc.), work with DAs on a regular basis. Absolutely, no sense of humor...
With a law that old, however, I think it could at the very least be challenged on 1st Amendment grounds. Afterall, isn't "selling" your vote just a political statement as to the complete lack of difference your vote makes?
Contest (Score:3, Insightful)
I can't help but wonder what anyone could say if it was worded like that, lobbyists seem to be getting away with officials putting it like that.
If that is true that one cannot sell their vote (Score:3, Insightful)
then arrest everyone in Congress that took money from lobbyists in order to vote for or against certain bills in Congress. Don't just arrest the little people but the big ones as well.
Maybe (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Does it really matter?
The worst thing that can happen to the world right now, is that a republican or a democrat wins the US elections.
Mmmh.. are you making the point that no matter what or how the winner of this election will be just a plain old Republican or Democrat and that it won't make anything any worse anyways or are you trying to say that the worst that could happen would be that there would be a winner to this upcoming election as opposed to no winner at all and that the world would be better off if the USA didn't have a president?