Why aren't prisoners allowed to vote?

[Saint Frankenstein]

I don't understand that. I think prisoners should be allowed to vote. If any idiot who registers is allowed, they should be allowed. I mean, does committing a crime strip you of your rights as a citizen? It doesn't make sense to me.

 

[Skwim]

I don't understand that. I think prisoners should be allowed to vote. If any idiot who registers is allowed, they should be allowed. I mean, does committing a crime strip you of your rights as a citizen? It doesn't make sense to me.

Some of your rights? Yup. Want to vote? Then stay out of prison. And the law goes even further. Want to own a firearm? Then stay out of prison.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Some of your rights? Yup. Want to vote? Then stay out of prison. And the law goes even further. Want to own a firearm? Then stay out of prison.

Access to firearms =/= being able to vote

 

[TurkeyOnRye]

Certainly it would be logical for a prisoner to have a say in deciding decisions that might land a he/she in prison...or perhaps get he/she out of prison. The current trend of legalization of marijuana is a perfect example.

 

[JustCallMeNick]

I don't understand that. I think prisoners should be allowed to vote. If any idiot who registers is allowed, they should be allowed. I mean, does committing a crime strip you of your rights as a citizen? It doesn't make sense to me.

I don't think it makes sense to keep felons or others on parole/probation from voting, either. That's just a form of voter suppression, in a country that disproportionately incarcerates African-Americans.

Meanwhile, go Vermont and Maine! Map of State Criminal Disfranchisement Laws | American Civil Liberties Union

 

[Skwim]

Access to firearms =/= being able to vote

?

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

?

They are not the same thing by any stretch of the imagination. There's no harm in allowing prisoners, parolees and people on probation to vote.

 

[Curious George]

They are not the same thing by any stretch of the imagination. There's no harm in allowing prisoners, parolees and people on probation to vote.

If you are trying to establish a nexus, what is the harm in allowing someone with a non violent felony to vote? I agree with you that once a sentence has been served that there is no reason to prevent voting. But to say that rights are not comparable to other rights is not true. Certainly distinctions can and should be made depending upon the right effected but comparing them is not arbitrary.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

If you are trying to establish a nexus, what is the harm in allowing someone with a non violent felony to vote? I agree with you that once a sentence has been served that there is no reason to prevent voting. But to say that rights are not comparable to other rights is not true. Certainly distinctions can and should be made depending upon the right effected but comparing them is not arbitrary.

Huh?

 

[Curious George]

Huh?

You suggested that comparing the right of gun ownership to the right of voting was absurd. Both of these are rights, I am saying that it is fair to compare the two in regard to the government regulation of them after prison.

While I certainly agree that in some instances we can find some nexus to the proposed regulation quite easily. These are the apparent instances wherein you have an offender that was locked up for armed robbery. This could be extended to all violent crime. However, I think the connection gets more attenuated as we move away from felonies that involve violence. So if this is the reasoning, we can see that for some felonies a restriction on owning a firearm makes just as little sense as a restriction on the right to vote.

 

[Skwim]

If you are trying to establish a nexus, what is the harm in allowing someone with a non violent felony to vote? I agree with you that once a sentence has been served that there is no reason to prevent voting. But to say that rights are not comparable to other rights is not true. Certainly distinctions can and should be made depending upon the right effected but comparing them is not arbitrary.

I was simply replying to your question "does committing a crime strip you of your rights as a citizen?" In effect saying, Yes, there are rights one is stripped of, including the right to vote, and as an ex-felon, the right to own a firearm.

 

[JustCallMeNick]

I was simply replying to your question "does committing a crime strip you of your rights as a citizen?" In effect saying, Yes, there are rights one is stripped of, including the right to vote, and as an ex-felon, the right to own a fire.

The question is, why should the right to vote be stripped? I get why you shouldn't be allowed to own a gun if you've committed a violent felony. I don't get why you shouldn't be allowed to choose who represents you in government.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Prisoners should not be able to vote while serving their sentences. Once out and payed debt to society then voting should be allowed imo.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I seem to recall a very big fuss was made over "no taxation without representation." They pay taxes, thus they should have a voice.

 

[Curious George]

I was simply replying to your question "does committing a crime strip you of your rights as a citizen?" In effect saying, Yes, there are rights one is stripped of, including the right to vote, and as an ex-felon, the right to own a firearm.

Wasn't my question, bub.

 

[Skwim]

Wasn't my question, bub.

AArgh!

Sorry about that. Guess I should go to bed.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Prisoners should not be able to vote while serving their sentences. Once out and payed debt to society then voting should be allowed imo.

Why? That was my question in the first place. Why strip them of the right to vote, specifically? It doesn't make sense to me.

 

[Curious George]

Why? That was my question in the first place. Why strip them of the right to vote, specifically? It doesn't make sense to me.

It is seen both as both retributive utilitarian. Punishment and deterrence for violating social norms is done through deprivation and threat of deprivation of rights. this arguably deters people from committing crime and punishes them when they do.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Why? That was my question in the first place. Why strip them of the right to vote, specifically? It doesn't make sense to me.

Its generally due to people who reject the rules of society that wind them up in prison ,by which through their actions have demonstrated a disdain for the welfare and security of society.
.
Released prisoners should be able to. Just not those actively serving sentences.

Voting is a privilege not a right actually in light it can be revoked legally.

Used to be only landowners and males could vote at one time.

Maybe a grassroots campaign could change things as they stand at present.

 

[YmirGF]

It is seen both as both retributive utilitarian. Punishment and deterrence for violating social norms is done through deprivation and threat of deprivation of rights. this arguably deters people from committing crime and punishes them when they do.

Also part of the idea is that voters are in good standing with their society or are "upstanding" citizens - as it should be...