Linked by Howard Fosdick on Thu 8th Nov 2012 20:12 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 541658
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Fingerprint? Ok, THAT is the sign of a oppressive (maybe repressive) regime. Also what about people without fingerprints? This happens. (lost fingers or no fingerprints through working some sort of manual labor that erodes fingerprints, e.g. making chain mails for the Lord of the Rings movies)
Also what about people without fingerprints?
No problem, just toss out dupes that have clearly defined fingerprints. People without fingerprints make up less than 1% of the population so their impact would be negligible.
That would be much better than the current system where people vote for the dead/disabled/elderly/apathetic.
http://pjmedia.com/jchristianadams/2012/05/16/53000-dead-voters-fou...




Member since:
2006-02-28
Each person should have three forms with their vote on it. One is immediately tallied via state managed database and kept as a receipt. The other two are sent to *independent* counters. By having three independent tallies we can ensure the vote hasn't been tampered and recounts would never be required.
Also, instead of voter id, just use a fingerprint. With it a database can make sure you are on file as a registered voter. And a purple finger means you voted (recall Iraq elections anyone!?)