Help!! Voting in Missouri tomorrow!

[Roxi]

I'm having a bit of trouble with two amendments and deciding how to vote. Am looking for your input.

Specifics for Amendment 5:

http://ballotpedia.org/Missouri_Right_to_Bear_Arms,_Amendment_5_(August_2 014)


Specifics for Amendment 9:

http://ballotpedia.org/Missouri_Electronic_Data_Protection,_Amendment_9_( August_2014)


I will be voting no on all the other amendments, but these two have me stuck... Though, Amendment 9 seems like it should be a for sure yes, I'm concerned that I'm missing something.

[tsai3904]

The House sponsor of Amendment 9 is Rep. Paul Curtman, who endorsed Ron Paul.

Here's a short podcast he did on the amendment:
http://www.ipadio.com/broadcasts/Paul_Curtman/2014/7/7/Electronic-Privacy-Amendment-Amendment-9

Here's an article about the amendment after the Supreme Court's cell phone decision:
http://www.missourinet.com/2014/07/02/amendment-9-backers-say-it-would-go-farther-than-recent-us-supreme-court-ruling/

[Roxi]

Excellent, thank you!! That solves that issue...


Anyone know about Amendment 5?

[lib3rtarian]

Excellent, thank you!! That solves that issue...


Anyone know about Amendment 5?

I don't know if there is any catch or fine print with that one, but I'd vote YES for this.

http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/images/0/00/MO_2014_Amendment_5_sample_ballot.JPG

[nayjevin]

I don't know if there is any catch or fine print with that one, but I'd vote YES for this.

http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/images/0/00/MO_2014_Amendment_5_sample_ballot.JPG

The main criticisms I believe were that it didn't seem necessary, but as far as I can see it adds protections and doesn't remove any.

[nayjevin]

Open primary be ready to choose your ballot and be aware of the executive races including judges. I had a lot of empty bubbles, because there was only one candidate or because the information I could find online didn't prepare me to be informed for the particular race.

I chose the ballot that had a race I thought was close and had a clear better choice. The general will be a new choice.

Man I wish I could have voted for a good judge. That makes a difference.

Was able to vote against two new taxes.

[nayjevin]

The House sponsor of Amendment 9 is Rep. Paul Curtman, who endorsed Ron Paul.

Here's a short podcast he did on the amendment:
http://www.ipadio.com/broadcasts/Paul_Curtman/2014/7/7/Electronic-Privacy-Amendment-Amendment-9

Here's an article about the amendment after the Supreme Court's cell phone decision:
http://www.missourinet.com/2014/07/02/amendment-9-backers-say-it-would-go-farther-than-recent-us-supreme-court-ruling/

The argument against this is that it's already been decided by the supreme court, so isn't necessary. It definitely clarifies state constitution language to include electronic seizures in an intelligent, unambiguous, and readable way. Rare case where adding words to law is good.

[tsai3904]

The argument against this is that it's already been decided by the supreme court, so isn't necessary. It definitely clarifies state constitution language to include electronic seizures in an intelligent, unambiguous, and readable way. Rare case where adding words to law is good.

Curtman says the Supreme Court only dealt with cell phones while this amendment goes further:


“(The case decided by the Supreme Court) Riley v. California really focuses a lot more on … law enforcement’s jurisdiction with our smart phones,” says Curtman. “Our bill says electronic communications and data, and I think that people have a reasonable expectation of privacy even when they upload things into a secure cloud that only they would have access to, and that certainly isn’t just smartphones.”

[Roxi]

Thanks everyone!