So some criminals can't vote

Kytro · 10-08-2006, 10:47 PM

I am correct in assuming that in the US, some convicted criminals can never vote again?

I'm not convinced this is an altogether good idea. I am well aware of the idea that if you don't want to be punished, you shouldn't commit crimes, however this does not automatically mean it is a good idea.

What are the benefits of restricting the the righto vote in this way?

If someone can no longer influence policy, would it not make them more likey to continue to commit crimes?

I find they way crimes are handled to be somewhat odd, there does not seem to be any specific penalities.

I'd support losing the right to vote say, if you were involved in election fraud etc (at least for a given time).

JaJae · 10-08-2006, 11:04 PM

While I don't completely agree with not letting criminals vote... just to play Devil's Advocate:

Why should we care about the input of people who choose not live peacefully within society?

Kytro · 10-08-2006, 11:12 PM

Originally Posted by JaJae

Why should we care about the input of people who choose not live peacefully within society?

As I mentioned before, I understand this viewpoint but I am not sure it is actually of use to society.

Why allow them input?

Reasons I can think of:

* Everyone makes mistakes. Not everyone makes illegal mistakes and gets caught, however having no input could lead to frustration. (Society won't listen to me, so I will do whatever I want)

* Just because someone commits a crime, does not mean the input they have isn't valuable.

* Having commited a crime does not seem to have any direct link to voting. You could apply the same logic to many things. Such as being able to drive a car, or eat in a resturant etc.

Dumpy Dooby · 10-08-2006, 11:17 PM

People should only lose the right to vote while they're being punished (during probation, parole, jail/prison time, manditory rehab, etc.). After that, I see no reason to not let them vote.

JaJae · 10-08-2006, 11:20 PM

Originally Posted by Dumpy Dooby

People should only lose the right to vote while they're being punished (during probation, parole, jail/prison time, manditory rehab, etc.). After that, I see no reason to not let them vote.

I agree. We need to give criminals the sense of being welcomed back into society to help prevent them from going back in.

Kytro · 10-08-2006, 11:21 PM

Originally Posted by Dumpy Dooby

People should only lose the right to vote while they're being punished (during probation, parole, jail/prison time, manditory rehab, etc.). After that, I see no reason to not let them vote.

I agree that while still being punished losing the right to vote makes sense.

hsmith · 10-08-2006, 11:25 PM

Criminals should regain all their rights as citizens once they do their time.

If they are still a danger, then they should not be allowed to be out of jail.

R-Type · 10-08-2006, 11:39 PM

I'd group voting in with the 'brand' we call felon.. Either people are rehabilitated enough to rejoin society with all the rights and priviledges thereof, or they aren't, and should still be incarcerated. Branding people and then letting them go just makes it harder for them to reassimilate, heightening the probability they'll return to crime to make it anywhere. What's the point of releasing them if we're going to take sure the only places they'll ever get work are fast food joints for min wage? Freedom without rights is basically a jail without bars.

IminWonderland · 10-08-2006, 11:55 PM

Originally Posted by Dumpy Dooby

People should only lose the right to vote while they're being punished (during probation, parole, jail/prison time, manditory rehab, etc.). After that, I see no reason to not let them vote.

I agree. My Dad still wears his Scarlett Letter, he's not on probation, he's been out for over 10 years. He doesn't have to, but he still carries his felon card...

It's too bad.

Scrum · 10-09-2006, 01:04 AM

Originally Posted by hsmith

Criminals should regain all their rights as citizens once they do their time.

If they are still a danger, then they should not be allowed to be out of jail.

And if the jail is too crowded for that, lets start letting out the people in there for drug possesion.

Kytro · 10-09-2006, 01:13 AM

Originally Posted by Scrumtralecent

And if the jail is too crowded for that, lets start letting out the people in there for drug possesion.

Well how is possesion make them a "danger" ?

IminWonderland · 10-09-2006, 01:30 AM

Originally Posted by Kytro

Well how is possesion make them a "danger" ?

Haven't you seen the film REEFER MADNESS?

phreak · 10-09-2006, 06:47 AM

i doubt a large portion of convicted felons give two shits about voting or politics.

Scrum · 10-09-2006, 09:20 AM

Originally Posted by phreak

i doubt a large portion of convicted felons give two shits about voting or politics.

Maybe we should just poll people and we can selectivly remove constitutional rights when people aren't likely to care about them?

kinggovernor · 10-09-2006, 11:11 AM

I don't want decisions to be made in my country by convicted felons

hsmith · 10-09-2006, 11:19 AM

Originally Posted by kinggovernor

I don't want decisions to be made in my country by convicted felons

standing up for others rights!

DosEquis · 10-09-2006, 11:21 AM

I dont think a person convicted of violent crimes (felony) should be allowed to own weapons after they serve their time. It is only part of their life time punishment and if allowed to own such weapons their chances of repeating are decent.

While i buy the 'if they are still violent dont let them out'... not being able to have certain rights based upon their crimes is not out of the question. As part of someones punishment for robbing a convienent store, a felony, serving a few years and never owning a gun again, does not sound unreasonable.

Being allowed to vote is a different matter. I don't think politicians are going to go out and try to appeal or get the convict vote...like they do say..the mexican vote. So i dont think many laws would change to help the said felons.

hsmith · 10-09-2006, 11:55 AM

Originally Posted by DosEquis

I dont think a person convicted of violent crimes (felony) should be allowed to own weapons after they serve their time. It is only part of their life time punishment and if allowed to own such weapons their chances of repeating are decent.

While i buy the 'if they are still violent dont let them out'... not being able to have certain rights based upon their crimes is not out of the question. As part of someones punishment for robbing a convienent store, a felony, serving a few years and never owning a gun again, does not sound unreasonable.

Being allowed to vote is a different matter. I don't think politicians are going to go out and try to appeal or get the convict vote...like they do say..the mexican vote. So i dont think many laws would change to help the said felons.

How is the right to vote more important than the right to defend your life?

Dumpy Dooby · 10-09-2006, 12:01 PM

Originally Posted by kinggovernor

I don't want decisions to be made in my country by convicted felons

Why?

Dumpy Dooby · 10-09-2006, 12:04 PM

You show me a man that opposes a convicted felon's right to vote, and I'll show you a man that has never met a convicted felon.