But what is rarely pointed out is that this bar is not just a long-term staple of establishment thinking. Opponents of felon voting say the restrictions are consistent with other voting limitations such as age, residency, mental capacity, and other felon If we thought that prisoners could not be rehabilitated, then they should not be released. In my opinion it is great that homosexuals want to adopt children, because it is not about who they are being raised by. There is no popular call whatsoever for prisoners serving short sentences to be allowed the vote and yet the preposterous Lord Prescott, that brave class warrior with a seat in the Lords and a penchant for croquet, says that inmates locked up for less than a year should be allowed to attend the ballot box. It would have rendered the vote academic, in the pejorative sense.
Despite, the fact they were working as serving prisoners and would be released in the next political term. Just like the days of the three-fifths clause, modern day prison-based gerrymandering means politicians lack an incentive to reduce the number of prisons in their district since they benefit politically from them—and they benefit without having to listen to the needs and concerns of those imprisoned. Those who defy the law will be punished, yes, but their human rights should never be taken from them. So why can't they vote? They have developed a list of 47,000 voters who may be felons, and have asked local officials to consider purging them. Many states have enacted laws prohibiting the voting rights of felons or those previously convicted of felonies. Currently when we send someone to prison we strip them of their identity, remove their right to vote and label them as a criminal. Including bankers, corporate lawyers and several employers who already work with prisoners.
All answers to reader questions are provided for informational purposes only. Yes, people do change, and usually when someone shows an improvement in their behaviour, their sentence is sometimes reduced, of course depending on the crime they committed. Although giving prisoners the right to vote has been discussed between those in power, it is unlikely anything will change in the foreseeable future. If we can use them in other nation building activities, why not allow them to vote? In his State of the Union address in January, President Bush announced a new national commitment to helping prisoners re-enter society. On paper this does seem to be pretty valid, if you break the law, things that at one time you were entitled to are now no longer allowed. It is not difficult to see why so many people think that internationally imposed human rights laws tend to go a bit too far, to the point of imposing on the sovereignty of an independent nation, particularly in light of two recent instances. And then the person can have their rights again.
Although voters in Massachusetts saw prisoner political participation as a kind of insurrection, it is nothing like the violent insurrections that marked prisons of the 1970s. An interesting and reasonable way to resolve this would be to give voting rights to prisoners with sentences that are due to end over the next four or five years. Additional arguments for restoring the right to vote to prisoners and ex-felons can, no doubt, be given. This year, state officials are conducting a new purge that may be just as flawed. One non-violent crime stays on your… 1579 Words 7 Pages Should prisoners be given the right to vote? Felony is a crime, typically one involving violence, regarded as more serious than a misdemeanor, and usually punishable by imprisonment for more than one year or by death. They are put behind bars for a reason—they are dangerous murderers, thieves and rapists, not law-abiding citizens.
Many with family already impacted by political decisions. Here are six reasons supporters give for restoring voting rights to ex-felons: 1. Appropriate retribution is said to only occur when an appropriate punishment is given for the crime Hegel, 1965. The results revealed that out of 1468 participants, 853 58. Denying the vote to ex-offenders is antidemocratic, and undermines the nation's commitment to rehabilitating people who have paid their debt to society.
For the safety of everyone else, we put restrictions on those activities. As the United States prepares for its 57th presidential election over five million of its citizens will be denied their right to participate in the electoral process. There are arguments in regards to both of these points. I think the should not get to vote there thieves who did something wrong and should pay the consciences for there actions. A significant fraction of prisoners are racial minorities or were financially disenfranchised before their incarceration.
It should be abolished along with its other components. Not having the right to vote should be a clear deterrent to people considering committing a crime, and if they committed the crime, then you could argue that the vote really isn't that important anyway? The right of self-protection and protection of harm to others, for example, can justify incapacitating dangerous criminals but it cannot justify restricting or removing voting rights. Or is there another solution, whereby the right to vote is dependent on the nature of the prison sentence, with certain prisoners — depending on their crime and sentence — given the right to vote? This is far too many states for comfort. What are the arguments in favour of prisoner voting? I think that it is not fair because, the problems that the prisoners are having in prison. A version of this editorial; series appears in print on July 11, 2004, on Page 4004012 of the National edition with the headline: Felons and the Right to Vote. This retributivist justification for punishment maintains that punishment of a wrongdoer is justified for the reason that she deserves something bad to happen to her just because she has knowingly done wrong; this could include pain, deprivation, or death. Being cut off from society is a certain drawback when it comes to voting.
I would say no, but when their debt is paid it is important to bring them back, and allowing them to vote is essential. Terry McAuliffe issued a sweeping executive order that changed the lives of 200,000 ex-felons in Virginia, instantly restoring their right to vote. Not rehabilitation, which is only for people that have short term Jail time. The fact is, however, that a majority of the people in this country are of the opinion that international laws seem to be undermining our own legislative process, especially when it comes to human rights. When felons are still doing time, should they still be allowed? Recidivism is also a risk for ex-criminals.