Should convicts be allowed to vote?

[Sirotnikov]

Well as far as I know, here in Israel, even convicts serving their time are allowed to vote.

I'm not sure it's very good - but unless I'm horribly wrong - it's reality.

[Dr Strangelove]

Originally posted by Ming
Once their debt to society has been paid "fully"... let them vote. If we aren't going to treat them like full citizens, we shouldn't let them out.

Oh Ming! You are soooo progressive! Yes, Yes, Yes! Let's not let them out! We'll call it the Valjean law!

[Sava]

Valjean law

dirty boy!

[Dr Strangelove]

You certainly don't let them vote while they're in prison because they might elect politicians who would repeal the laws that they broke. Since most state prisons are in rural settings the prison population could easily overwhelm the natives.

[Bosh]

When they commit a crime, they forfeit their right to vote.

[oedo]

Originally posted by Albert Speer Oedo:

you're getting into the area of lunacy by saying there should be no punishments for crimes... rapists should be let off the hook?

oh please
don´t put words into my mouth I simply didn´t say.
like you I think that crime law is necessary. I just use a different approach in order to justify it. crime law is necessary, because a society would sooner or later (or maybe even instantly) fall into anarchy without it. I wouldn´t want to live in a society without any crime law. my approach is a pure pragmatic one.

but unlike you I only see few moral relevance in punishment. I think one of Slowwhand´s posts describes your point very succinct:

Crime law sets the punishment.
Parents, teachers, good friends, and the Church prevent.

I´d call this a dogmatic approach.

Originally posted by yavoon
oedo I don't think I'm the moral relativist u r. so thats probably where we aren't seeing eye to eye.

I don´t think I´m a moral relativist and I even would feel better if you´d call me a cynic.

[Ramo]

When they commit a crime, they forfeit their right to vote.

Looks like someone hacked into Boshko's account.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by yavoon
u think draconian doesn't work? try singapore.

It's not draconian. just becayse you get fined not flushing the toilet after you finished using it. Draconian is getting profiled for being a minority. Draconian is not getting a second chance.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
Draconian is not getting a second chance.

It's not like we throw them in prison to rot. Most prisoners get released eventually.

[Frankychan]

in many states, the money for rehab has been eliminated. therefore, most convicts ARE being sent in prison to rot.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Frankychan
therefore, most convicts ARE being sent in prison to rot.

Recidivism rates are different from what UR is talking about.

[NeOmega]

What about minor felonies.... like ones that dont have any prison time, or even bail. And result in a $2000 fine?

Here in Washington State, that'll lose you your right to vote for seven years, if you bother to hire a lawyer to have it expunged, if not, you cannot vote for a lifetime.

Non-violent felons should be allowed to vote.

Rapists and murderers should be allowed to vote if they serve very lengthy sentences, but since that doesn't happen any more, and they are let out after a year, they shouldn't be allwoed to vote.

[Frankychan]

DD-true. Last I saw, in this state at least, the recividism rate was 66 percent. But that decreases dramatically with education obtained by inmates who are educated in prison.

[Frankychan]

Looking back, I get what UR is getting at. Had to think about it. But getting back to what I was talking about, education has the biggest impact against recidivism in prisons today. But with all the cut backs at the state as well as the federal level, we see more and more convicts returning to prison. In this respect, I can see UR's argument.