Quote Originally Posted by Tgo01 View Post
In an ideal world I don’t think we should allow the type of person you are describing to vote. The problem is I don’t trust the potential person or government to make this decision. Sure it starts out with just the dementia patients who don’t even know what year it is, but slowly and surely it broadens to encompass more people who just so happen to vote a certain way.

My dad had ONE appointment with a VA psychiatrist and they deemed him mentally incompetent, even though his mind was as sharp as ever. While we were appealing this decision my dad received a letter stating that since he was declared mentally incompetent he was no longer allowed to own a firearm. His second amendment right was stripped away from him based on a single session with a single doctor.

Sure we appealed it and the VA reversed their decision, but my dad lost one of his rights for months because of some asshole at the VA.

So I would rather error on the side of not stripping away people’s rights, if that means legit mentally unfit people can continue to vote then that’s the way I lean.
You make a very good point. I’m sorry that happened to your dad. I agree there is a great risk exposure to corruption on how such a test and whom would administer, and would also error on the side of caution before stripping away anyone’s rights.

Surely today in 2024 we could come up with an unbiased standard application of a literacy and/or very low bar civic test to register to vote. Maybe we can use or implement AI to make it as free from human corruption as possible? We could start small with at first being voluntary, and if successful there roll out to a single state. I dunno…maybe it truly can’t be solved for like that and you are correct the risk of tyranny is greater than the benefit. I’m just brainstorming here.