Restoring Felons Right To Vote

[tropicsgoddess]

They've paid their debts to society, but unfortunately they face many obstacles with jobs and such and unfortunately with elections coming up a good number have to go through a lengthy process to apply for clemency in order to restore their voting rights. Should a felon be able to vote or should they still be stripped of their right, despite the fact they have paid their debts to society and served their time?

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/loc...2.story?page=2

[Sylvia727]

They're here, they're affected by these decisions, why shouldn't they be allowed to vote? To paraphrase Susan B. Anthony, "It says 'we, the people', not 'we, the white male unconvicted citizens',".

Since I just renewed my voter registration recently, I can say with authority that in my state, the question runs "Are you currently paroled for a felony?" which to me sounds like a felon who has finished serving his time, including parole, is allowed to vote. And that sounds right to me.

[crazylegs]

The punishment of imprisonment is the loss of liberty, not the loss of other basic human rights (right to life <other than lawful execution>, right not to be hald incommunicado, right to free speech <other than lawful restrictions to maintain a safe society>), a right to vote comes under that so yes, they should be able to vote.

[Slytovhand]

Except...

a criminal is one who has blatantly and deliberatly chosen to disregard the laws of society. They have infringed upon other people's rights in the same way. They have taken a look at the society in which they have been brought up in, and in a sense, chosen to 'betray' all that they had been given by that society.

And now you think they are entitled to have a say in that society that they abused??

I'm certainly not so sure.

I think that just doing the time is a way to punish them - it doesn't really do anything to say that they choose to be a participant in that society again.

There are people who live in that society for a time who respect those laws, and the culture and society, and who give a great deal, who don't have that right to vote.

I think, after doing that time, if you want to get that 'right to vote' back, you have to earn it back.

Sorry Crazy, but I don't think that the 'right to vote' comes under 'basic human rights'. 'Basic societal rights' maybe....

[anriana]

a criminal is one who has blatantly and deliberatly chosen to disregard the laws of society. They have infringed upon other people's rights in the same way. They have taken a look at the society in which they have been brought up in, and in a sense, chosen to 'betray' all that they had been given by that society.

I don't agree with all the laws of American society, I just don't break them because I don't want to go to prison. With the way our prison industrial complex is, I don't agree with what you're saying. So many people are in jail for casual drug use and I certainly don't think that smoking marijuana infringes on my rights in anyway.

[Slytovhand]

Best example I can use to fully explain would be Socrates.

He was done for impiety and corrupting the young.


Ok, it was a dodgey call, and he went to court for it, and lost.

But, he chose to live there, he chose to abide by all the good bits that gave him the benefits he had lived off in that city for all his life. Heck, he even went to war to defend all of those rights, benefits, laws etc.

He was found guilty, and his punishment was death by drinking hemlock.

He had the chance to escape, cos all of his friends got together and said they could get him out (he'd be exiled for life, naturally). But no, he chose to stay and take his punishment.

It's called 'responsibility' - which means if you accept it, you also have to accept the consequences of your actions.

If he didn't accept all of those laws, then he had a moral obligation to either leave, or do something within that society to change them.... (or overthrow with a coup )

So - if those people are in jail because they broke the law, then what I said still stands. Our opinion is completely irrelevant. (can you imagine going before a magistrate and saying "Yeah, I couldn't really be bothered stopping at that intersection, I didn't feel I should have to, cos I disagree that there should be one there".) When it comes to drug use, there are enough countries (and sometimes even states) where you can use til your heart's content.

[Sylvia727]

They have taken a look at the society in which they have been brought up in, and in a sense, chosen to 'betray' all that they had been given by that society. ... it doesn't really do anything to say that they choose to be a participant in that society again.

I understand your point. Why should a serial killer's voice have the same weight as mine, a law abiding citizen? But in theory, it's "time for crime", and then it's a wash. People can change, if they want to and have the opportunity. Denying felons any of the rights of their fellow citizens makes them second class citizens, in essence perpetuating their punishment until the end of their lives. If there are people who deserve this, then keep them locked up.

Once released (and off parole), they should be the same as Joe Q. Citizen, because they've paid their debt and because that's the only opportunity for them to improve themselves. Why would anyone gain respect for a society that continued to punish him past the accepted time? There's a social contract: if you rob a bank, you should spend x years in prison. Jane robs a bank and spends her x years in prison, accepting the punishment of the society she lives in. But when she gets out, she receives an invisible punishment, beyond the prison time she has already served. How does that make her want to turn her life around and better herself? No matter what, for the rest of her life she will be a second class citizen, so she should just give up and go back to crime. Society doesn't respect her, why should she respect society?

Personally, I admire anyone who can come out of prison and turn their life around. People who can take menial jobs (often the only jobs available to ex-cons), work hand, do well, and live clean. It takes a helluva lotta strength of character, and my hat's off to anyone who does it.

There are people who live in that society for a time who respect those laws, and the culture and society, and who give a great deal, who don't have that right to vote.

Who? As far as I know, the right to vote in America is not denied to any citizen based on age (once adult), race, color, nationality, language, religion, politics, *takes a breath* sex, gender, orientation, marital status, pregnancy, parenthood, veteran status, or any other superficial differences.

[Slytovhand]

Sylvia...

I propose that those who want to do the turn around, or show that they've done the turn around, do some community service work for a while to prove it. Doing time is a punishment for getting caught, it doesn't show the willingness to rejoin society.

You refer only to citizens. I am referring to others who haven't taken out citizenship. I don't know what your laws are like where you are, but over here, kiwis can live in Aus for as long as they want, but (IIRC) they don't get to vote here, and the reverse is true as well. (edit) Also, there will be many visitors to the country who have working visas. While they pay taxes to that government, and do just about everything else as per any other citizens, no votes (and no other benefits... depending on your country).

[Sylvia727]

Why should they have to do community service? They're already paid for their crime. Anything they had to prove, they've proven by serving their time. Many prisons let the inmates out early for good behavior, an additional measure of their commitment to peaceful living.

I do refer exclusively to citizens, because as far as I can see, the whole point of citizenship is to delineate what society you've chosen to belong to. And adults who have the opportunity to leave the country of their births and choose not to are choosing to belong to that society. I dunno about Australia/New Zealand relations (did I get that right?), but in the USA illegal immigrants are supposed to be expelled, and legal immigrants are expected to apply for citizenship. Our system doesn't work, of course, but in theory everyone who wants to be a citizen can if they go through the red tape.

[Greenday]

Just because they served their time doesn't mean they've changed their ways. Part of me wants to say, "Yea, they were punished, let them go back on as normal". And then another part of me thinks, "This is the judicial system that lets people out of jail after only a couple of years for rapes, but decades for weed."

[crazylegs]

Just because they served their time doesn't mean they've changed their ways.

Perhaps not, but once they have served their punishment/rehabilitaion/'whatever the buzzword is today' then a retrospective and additional punishment is unnecessary, disproportionate and probably unlawful.

[Greenday]

I just don't see voting as a right. It's a privilege.

[Flyndaran]

I just don't see voting as a right. It's a privilege.

You have got to be kidding!
Voting is one of, if not the most, fundamental right of any citizen in a free world.

Freedom of travel is a right, but driving is a priviledge.
I can't imagine anyone of any other ostensibly democratic nation to have such a large number of citizens espousing such a sad opinion as the U.S. likely does.

Priviledges may be taken away by state, and even city ordinances. Rights require federal involvement.

[Greenday]

It's stuff like this http://www.ebaumsworld.com/video/watch/984622/ that scares me. Why should people be allowed to vote if they don't even bother learning what the hell they are voting for?

[the_std]

Because, if voting is a RIGHT, someone denied that right is essentially being told they are less worthy as a person, and just because someone is ignorant (yes, even painfully so) doesn't make them any less worthy as a person.