Advocates argue consulting with prisoners would get ideas on reducing crime because you would gain understanding on why they did what they did.
Name:
Anonymous2010-06-14 6:15
Giving prisoners the right to vote helps with their rehabilitation and keeps them in touch with society and their role as citizens within the wider community.
Plus they used to have the vote in Britain anyway. Til it was removed by the government.
Name:
Anonymous2010-06-14 9:06
Advocates argue consulting with prisoners would get ideas on reducing crime because you would gain understanding on why they did what they did.
Don't see the sense in that.
Giving prisoners the right to vote helps with their rehabilitation and keeps them in touch with society and their role as citizens within the wider community.
Most of them had that right before they went sent to prison. It didn't help.
Name:
Anonymous2010-06-14 10:41
>>2
Interesting opinion, but you really need to stab yourself in the stomach first or give $300 to an able bodied male who doesn't need charity to experience what their victim's have gone through before you believe criminals deserve equal voting rights because obviously your argument is lopsided.
Name:
Anonymous2010-06-14 10:41
victims*
oops
Name:
Anonymous2010-06-14 14:17
i totally agree
pedophiles should've a vote on family politics
their insight would be extremely useful there like amirite
Name:
Anonymous2010-06-14 14:45
What about a gradation? Those who committed serious crimes dont have it but others do?
Name:
Anonymous2010-06-14 16:37
>>7
If you can't vote because you're in jail, tough shit. How about that?
Name:
Anonymous2010-06-14 18:47
White people shouldn't be allowed to vote because they are racist and will vote for racists.
Name:
Anonymous2010-06-14 20:06
Prisoners don't have a right to vote in Japan.
Name:
Anonymous2010-06-14 23:47
>>10
Nor do they in any other countries' elections for that matter.
>>9
this would be a valid comparison -- IF white people committed a crime to become that way.
Name:
Charles Barkley2010-06-17 18:45
seems to me that if you break the laws, you forfeit the rights you normally would otherwise have if you were a productive, respectable member of society.
Name:
Anonymous2010-06-17 19:22
Yes
Name:
Green Party2010-06-17 19:23
Yes.
Name:
Anonymous2010-06-17 21:15
Advocates argue consulting with prisoners would get ideas on reducing crime because you would gain understanding on why they did what they did.
But we already have methods of analysis that perform this feat. Criminology is already quite a robust and knowledgeable field. Moreover, you would have to convince people that stopping crime can be directly related to "previously unknown" revelations as to why people commit crimes in general.
Name:
Anonymous2010-06-25 19:21
The Democrats are desperate to get new bodies to shuffle into that voting booth and pull the lever that has the big shiny "D" beside it. Giving the franchise to convicted felons? Sure! Amnesty and voting rights for thirty million wetbacks? Sure!
In Western nations this has been the case for centuries, only ending with postwar "reform." Felons are stripped of citizenship at conviction, as their crimes are so heinous that they amount to renunciation of citizenship and waging war on the society in which they live. Felons have no rights under the law, only privileges that can be withheld with or without warning, with or without cause, by any judge or police officer who believes the circumstances justify it at the moment.
Or so it was when, for example, New York City had twenty murders per year instead of one thousand.
>>19 Back to /n/, please!
Don't you mean /new/? Unless ``wetbacks'' have something to do with Transportation.
Name:
Anonymous2010-07-20 1:45
>>1
Taking away the right for prisoners to vote is like taking that right away from women. We can't just have a democracy for SOME people, because then it's not governed by the people, but by a totalitarian ruling class who throws their opposers in jail and defines who will be allowed to vote. If you think that moral faggotry was bad now, just wait until it can snowball completely unrestrained. One crazed moral fad later, and anyone opposing Harry Potter will have no legal means to stop their persecution.
...but you know what? Fuck you. Fuck you all. I hate you pathetic humans. I hope you suffer.
Strange as it sounds, that's what sovereign nations do.
Name:
Anonymous2010-07-21 23:51
>>21
Why would I trust the word or opinion of someone who demonstrates such a lack of empathy for their fellow man that they would cause undue harm upon them, at least before some kind of reconciliation and penance?
Name:
Anonymous2010-07-22 1:25
>>21
Maybe some nigger who stole a bike should be able to vote, but not felons.
Name:
Anonymous2010-07-22 13:18
I think voting is a right and not a privilege, therefore I believe criminals should be able to vote.
Name:
Anonymous2010-07-22 17:10
>>25
Rights are for citizens, not felons. Felons wage war on the society in which they live and by their actions renounce their citizenship.
The social contract is between the state and the citizen only.
Name:
Anonymous2010-07-23 3:22
>>26
I would argue that a felon is still a citizen, but you disagree with me, and that's fine.
Name:
Anonymous2010-07-23 11:46
>>27
The law says you are wrong by definition, so you're stupid. And that's fine too.
Name:
Anonymous2010-07-23 11:51
>>27
Well, you can't reach the voting booth while you're in prison, and that's fine too.
Besides, felons compose about 0.1% of the population or something so this discussion is pointless.
Name:
Anonymous2010-07-23 12:14
>>28
The law can be changed. I'm not arguing current laws, I'm just saying I think felons should have citizenship rights.
>>31 Are you implying felons are not citizens?
Not >>26 but I believe that felons forfeit their rights when they commit crimes upon society, not that they give up citizenship, but that they no longer have the rights and privileges that an ordinary citizen has.
>>33 Yes they should.
No, they should not. It's legal for prisoners to vote in Maine and Vermont Vermont
God damn it, just when I was starting to really dig Vermont and Thomas Naylor's secessionist rhetoric. Ah well, least they're still strong on Second Amendment rights.
Some states even prevent you from voting for LIFE even after you serve your sentence, parole, and leave jail completely. That is fucking BS.
Name:
Anonymous2010-07-25 17:48
>>37
Then don't commit a felony. What's the problem?
Prisoners already rape one another, mutilate and murder one another. "oh and they also can't vote, if they live long enough to get out" seems an odd thing to get worked up about.
Name:
Anonymous2010-07-25 18:28
>>38
Actually, I agree with him on the felony banned from voting for life BS. There's people who have innocently been convicted of crimes they did not commit, they served their sentences, and now are no longer able to vote. That is an awful law and should not have been enacted, even if there are those have actually committed a crime, served their time, and now reformed their old ways. That I agree with.
What I don't agree with is prisoners while serving time have the ability to vote. That is BS...it's bad enough that they get free housing, free food, and other things that people have to go out and work for to have, given to them through tax payer's money.
Name:
Anonymous2010-07-25 22:26
>>39
I thinking voting is a form of speech/expression and prohibiting people from voting is a violation of free speech. Am I the only one who thinks this way?