Should inmates have the right to vote in elections?

[sukeban]

@Ghogiel

 

I a sorry sukeban but when I told Ghogiel not to go on with that particular frame of reference I meant for all of you not to also. I am editing your post. Please feel free to post relevant statements in this thread which do NOT reference this particular topic. Sorry I was not more clear and thank you. ~Lisnpuppy

Edited February 23, 2012 by Lisnpuppy

[Flintlockecole]

Sure, why not? It'd be interesting to see who'd they vote for even if they choose to do so. Edited February 24, 2012 by Flintlockecole

[Ghogiel]

no. While you are in prison, you have NO rights. (aside from the right to warm place to sleep at night, three square meals a day, free health care, and cable TV...........)

How about some human rights?

Is this how the general populace condones that raping in prison thing?

 

 

I understand the point you are trying to make, Ghogiel. However no one has said anything about denying basic human rights and you referring to them thinking prison rape is ok is a bit on the flamy-baity side. SO lets not go there, hmm? Thank you. ~Lisnpuppy

"NO rights" seemed quite exclusive to me. :shrug:

[Lisnpuppy]

no. While you are in prison, you have NO rights. (aside from the right to warm place to sleep at night, three square meals a day, free health care, and cable TV...........)

How about some human rights?

Is this how the general populace condones that raping in prison thing?

 

 

I understand the point you are trying to make, Ghogiel. However no one has said anything about denying basic human rights and you referring to them thinking prison rape is ok is a bit on the flamy-baity side. SO lets not go there, hmm? Thank you. ~Lisnpuppy

"NO rights" seemed quite exclusive to me. :shrug:

 

Regardless, it may have SEEMED that way to you, but I know that your response to it on this site in this thread IS excessive. A myriad of responses could have been made by you to demonstrate your condemnation of what the other poster said. I have said now twice I wished this off-topic flame attempt to go away and yet you choose to argue the point here with me. My benevolence has ended and you get a strike. Here I was hoping not to have to use the yellow marker today. ~Lisnpuppy

[Aurielius]

no. While you are in prison, you have NO rights. (aside from the right to warm place to sleep at night, three square meals a day, free health care, and cable TV...........)

"Five current and former prison inmates in Illinois are pressing forward with a federal lawsuit against the state claiming the amount of soy in their diets while behind bars caused them ``irreparable, actual harm.''

Their lawyer, Gary Cox, says he's found four expert witnesses to bolster the argument that their treatment violated the eighth amendment prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment.

 

Meanwhile, one Florida jail is being sued by one of its inmates who says he's being tortured -- because he has to watch the same movies over and over again."It's a lot like Chinese water torture," said James Poulin

 

A Pennsylvania prisoner has lost his appeal of a lawsuit against Kim, Kourtney and Khloe Kardashian over the "extreme emotional distress" he said watching their reality TV shows caused him.

The prisoner, Daniel Goodson, had argued in a September 10 complaint that the sisters intended their behavior on "Keeping Up with the Kardashians" and "Kourtney & Khloe Take Miami" to cause him injury. He had sought more than $75,000 in damages, as well as an apology.

 

And this is who some want to re enfranchise? These inmates cared little about what was cruel and unusual when they were free to prey on their victims, to give such as these a political base is beyond the theater of the absurd.

[sukeban]

And this is who some want to re enfranchise? These inmates cared little about what was cruel and unusual when they were free to prey on their victims, to give such as these a political base is beyond the theater of the absurd.

That might be completely true in the case of those inmates, but that doesn't mean it's true of all or most inmates.

 

http://www.motherjones.com/files/images/Blog_US_Prison_Growth.jpg

 

All I can ask is if the US has become a ~380% more depraved/predatory society (as measured by total incarceration) in the 26 years since 1980? Either we have, in which case incarceration rates are accurate measurements of our society's health; or we have not, in which case they aren't. If the latter, one would still need to explain the explosive growth of the prison population.

 

The theory that I would advance would be that pre-1980 and the "tough on crime" fad that swept our politicians, inmates tended to be the sorts of people that you referenced above, conscienceless predators and prolific career-criminals. AKA, probably the folks that 99% of us can agree definitely should be in prison (and shouldn't vote either). However, after the quixotic campaigns against crime in the 70s/80s/90s, we've ended up with all sorts of misguided snares trapping up otherwise redeemable amateur crooks. Said snares (harsh drug laws, mandatory-sentencing, three-strikes laws) both cast a wider net (prison for nonviolent drug convictions) as well as keep people in jail longer (mandatory-sentencing, three-strikes). Which has positively exploded our prison system.

 

By which I mean (from Wiki):

 

"From 1982 to 2000, California's prison population increased 500%. To accommodate this population growth and the war on crime, the state of California built 23 new prisons at a cost of 280 million to 350 million dollars apiece. By way of comparison, during the 112-year-long period between 1852 and 1964, the state of California had constructed just 12 prisons."

 

In any case, all I really mean to say is that there are a lot of people in prison right now that aren't the monsters that you describe in the above (unless we have indeed become ~380% more monstrous since 1980...). These people are presently denied the vote.

 

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/67/US_incarceration_timeline-clean-fixed-timescale.svg/300px-US_incarceration_timeline-clean-fixed-timescale.svg.png

 

That's more than the entire population of Vermont, Wyoming, North Dakota, and Alaska -- combined

[Sync182]

I read the first half of the first page, and most of page 3. The rest was TL;DR - I just want to make that point clear.

 

Now, on to my response:

 

I'm sorry...why is the topic of prisoner's rights even coming up? :facepalm:

 

To all who protest that prisoners have rights, I say this: Where was your campaigning for the rights of those that became the victims of those now in prison? What about the rights of people to NOT be raped, to NOT be assaulted, to NOT be murdered, to NOT be robbed? The criminal freely chose to take away the rights of another human being; in return, he/she forfeits his/her own rights.

 

The criminals should stop at being thankful we are a "more civilised" society; in "less-civilised" times they might have paid for their crimes with body parts...or their lives.

Edited February 24, 2012 by Sync182

[Lisnpuppy]

The topic is should inmates have the right to vote. Please get back on topic or this thread will need to be closed. ~Lisnpuppy

[SilverDNA]

Okay; I will try and bring it back on topic .

In this topic I see a lot of reasons;pro and contra why Inmates should or should not have the right to vote. On the personal level I understand why some people don't like the idea of inmates having the right to vote, but only on the personal level I do understand this. On the more objective level I'm for the rights of prisoners to express their political build up opinion through a vote.

 

So please let me introduce you why Europeans like the concept of debits and credits on the behalf of the; principles of Democracy.

If you open an account with the title of Democracy for a country/ State and write down every principles down as credits that are uphold on the matter of Democracy and all that is against basic principles of democracy as debits and count the points after you are finished.

In the end you need to have more credits than debits to call it a country/state one that follows democracy. Now be realistic there isn't any democratic country on this planet that has only credits on the account to call it self; fully righteous a Democracy. They are only simulating fully applied Democracy and violate this or that democratic ground principle.

 

One of the basic principles of a democracy is one person one vote. if you take a group regardless if they are inmates or unemployed or disabled or ect. ect. .. and denies them the rights to evolve a political opinion and to express a political opinion through a vote, you violate a principle of democracy and thus get a debit point. Any debit point is a big question mark that can be holed against a country / state against itself, because it raises the question is this countries/state a democracy or not? In one historic case it did take, for a so called democracy, only about 2 years to move from democracy to a tyranny. There the debits and credits point system kicks in because it is in every democratic nation it is upon the citizens to measure if a democracy is still applied or not.

 

On this topic it is the primal question now is it better to have debit or a credit on the ground principle of democratic applied rights in allowing or not allowing inmates the right to express their political opinion through a vote. Yes there are crimes so terrible and ugly that a convict can be seen as a monster. A monster that violated the rights of someone other, be it a person or a group or a country or a state. Isn't it the same in return to denies a prisoner the right to express themselves and be a part of society in voting? Think of it when it gets on rehabilitation of a prisoner. Does it cost more to have an political uninterested (because of the fact that he hasn't had for years the right to vote ) or a political participating prisoner that booth soon will get out of jail get integrated into a social functioning being? Why are so many criminals are eager to get back into prison and why it is so easy for them; because all ls set up and warm?

Let them take full responsibilities of their crimes and let them take the taste of what responsibility on political ground does really is in a democracy. Voting isn't only a privilege of a democratic nation or a right it is the in a democratic countries the responsibility to express participation in the applied system. Example if the inmates can't talk about politics at all with one another, because it doesn't matter that they don't have any political responsibility you give them the right to be political uneducated.

 

Now to all Americans are you a participant in full Democracy principles, or are you only part-time, if it fits my believes Democracy is a good thing and is useful to my personal views and prospects, participant? Democracy is not only pleasant thing to have, it comes with consequences and responsibilities.

one of the ground principles is one person one vote to give everyone the chance to form a political opinion (regardless how it is formed) and especially the right and responsibility to express it through a vote for every individual person regardless of the group or groups the person belongs to.

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it. "

Evelyn Beatrice Hall (Pseudonym Stephen G. Tallentyre)

 

Isn't it the same with the right to express the political opinion through a vote ?

I hope now it is understood why on the objective matter I want the debit of not letting inmates participate in democracy gone is more important to me.

I value the democracy principles higher than my own opinion. I see the danger there that, if you denies one group the right to participate in democracy then you can denies it to all others as well with every personal objection you can come up with.

So yes let inmates have their vote if you want that debit gone and take up the responsibility to uphold a democracy of a Country / State you live in, because if you don't use your citizens rights to go against any debit you sooner (remember, 2 years) or later are at one point, when democracy has the same face value as fraud.

Edited February 24, 2012 by SilverDNA

[grannywils]

Silver, I must say you have made some very well thought out and astute points with respect to the democratic process. I will at least be rethinking my initial knee-jerk response to this thread. I agree with your thesis regarding how a democracy should work. And I agree with the philosophy of putting aside my personal feelings when thinking about what it means to be a true democracy. I certainly do not always agree with some of the things required of me as a true patriot, but I do understand them and always abide by them; as I believe in the democratic process. My mind is not entirely made up, but your very cogent text has given me reason to sit down and think it over. Thank you for your post.