What is the methodology used by folks who argue at the same time that:
(1) We should NOT push hard for laws that require voters to present valid identification (the proposed laws are more nuanced than that).
(2) WE SHOULD push hard for laws that require valid identification (and background checks) for people who wish to purchase particular types of guns and related equipment.
Note that we’re not asking here whether either position has or does not have merit. Perhaps the answer is simply about the differing magnitudes of the potential negative external costs of each. You tell me.