New Bill Bans Ex-Cons From Recieving Foodstamps For Life

[Panacea]

I'm opposed to barring felons from getting foods stamps. I had to give this issue some thought; normally I'm a law and order type and it irks me that there are people who abuse food stamps.

However, it occurs to me that just because someone gets out of prison doesn't mean they are going to abuse food stamps. Oh, sure, I'm sure some will. But that's not the point.

The point is, we send people to prison as punishment. When they are released, the punishment has ended, and they are supposed to be reintegrating into society. Banning food stamps from felons simply continues the punishment after release. Given the difficulty most felons have in finding jobs after they get out, I think this would just drive people who want to get their lives back and move on back into criminal activity. It just doesn't make sense, and strikes me as a cheap shot against people with little recourse or support in fighting back, to give some jackass politician "street cred."

[s_stabeler]

itr's even worse when this is presented as a measure to prevent rapists and murderers from recieving food stamps, when that could be prevented easily enough by banning currently serving inmates from recieving food stamps. THAT woud be a sensible measure, since inmates get their food free. banning those released from prison from recievng food stamps? No, they are likely to need them to allow them to reintegarate into society. on the other hand, I'm 99% sure the people proposing easures like this are the same people thta would prefer to go back to a prison system circa 1860, when it was purely about punishment, with no attempt at reform. (a common task in those days was to turn a handcrank, with someone coiming every so often to tighten a nut to make it more dificult. It did absolutely nothing.)

[draco664]

when there was an upper class, that was basically above the law,

Not exactly. The word privilege comes from privilegium, latin for "law applying to one person" The privileged class literally had "Private law".

They weren't above the law, they could still be hit with the legal stick, but they were judged by a different set of laws. Of course, that other set was pretty sweet...

[s_stabeler]

um, yeah the private law was sweet. it basically said that anything the privledged did to those below them was OK, anything they did to each other was subject to normal rules. (in roman times, a father could legally excecute his children for any reason)