In my state, to legally purchase a firearm you must first attend a 13.5 hour "hunter education course," which is only offered once a month. Just checked the state's hunter ed website, and the only courses offered this month and next month are 75 miles, one way, from my house. In March, a class is offered that's "only" 35 miles away. Also, from the state's website: "Please remember to bring a valid picture ID to the class."
Please explain to me how requiring that someone, not only show picture I.D., but also drive 150 miles, round trip, three days in a row to attend a mandatory 13.5 hour gun safety course, is *less* of an infringement on a citizen's constitutional rights than simply asking that people who want to vote get a photo ID?
IMO, both types of laws are intentional barriers put in place to limit the number and type of people who engage in certain activities. In the case of voter ID laws, the intent of the laws is clearly to limit the number of poor people who vote, many of whom are people of color, many of whom are likely to vote for Democratic candidates. On the other hand, mandatory gun safety classes clearly have very little to do with "safety," as the number of accidental gun deaths is already very, very low, and everything to do with limiting the number and types of people who are able to legally own firearms.
Just to be clear, I'm against voter ID laws, because I'd prefer to see more Democrats elected and I'm in favor of erecting even more barriers to make it more difficult to purchase firearms, because I'd prefer to live where fewer people are walking around carrying guns, but to try to argue that requiring that somebody get a photo ID to vote is anywhere even close to the burden placed on people who want to purchase a firearm in some states is disingenuous, IMO.