Should convicted felons be able to vote.

I recently had a discussion with a co-work and honestly I do not know how I feel about it. Maybe a libertarian can help me out here. The discussion came up because my company is being sold and one employee has a felony conviction from 25 years ago. During this time they have paid taxes, however they have not been able to cast a vote in any election. I am well aware of the slogan No taxation without representation and how it was used in the 1700. However, could one make the case that felons are expected to pay taxes, yet because of a conviction lose their right to representation? The point is he/felons served their time or made reparations (I don't know if that is the right word "help") for their crimes. The point is they are square with the house and should they forfeit their right to representation? I do believe that the right to vote is not a privilege. Privilege to me means oppression, and a right represents freedom which is what this country was the reason this country was founded. This made me think very hard about what America is to me and they pretty much changed my mind. I feel as long as convicted felons are paying taxes, they should retain the right to vote ( this argument could also be made for owning guns as well). I do agree that yes some convicted felons have committed very bad crimes. However, as Americans how can we have a say in our government, how can we make someone pay taxes yet not give them the right to have a say in the policies of America? Especially after they have served their punishment? I am sure this has been hashed out before but I could not find it through the search. I am also concerned maybe I do no thave the right outlook on this.

 

Interesting question TA,

I'm confident each side (pro's and con's) can express a convincing argument for their logic.


My personal opinion is relatively moderate by some standards. I would support suspension of voting rights while incarcerated and on parole. But once maxed out, the right should be restored automatically.

just my thought

 

That is where I am kinda stuck I see the logic behind the objection then again that little voice in the back of my head keeps saying no! I hope it will be an intresting discussion!

 

I think it depends on the felony. Voter fraud, banned for life. Embezzled $100 from the state, restroe voting rights. Now, should dead people be allowed to vote?

 

Patrick,

Voter fruad rarely happens, I do not think you can cherry pick who would have the right or who would not. They would all still have to pay taxes and it goes back to the orginal point of the thread. I know it is not a white and black subject, you can see I still struggle with it.

 

No, but I can see your struggle with trying to justify having convicted felons vote. Voting fraud and election fraud are not rare. There is a reson that thusands of bogus viter regisstrations are logged and there is also a reason the registration lists aren't kept current. So, voter and election fraud exist, aren't rare, and should result in never again being involved in voting as a voter or an official.

A. We currently have different systems in each state. Some states do distinguish between violent and non-violent felonies and some prohibit voting for convictions of certain misdemeanors.

B. I don't know what paying taxes would have to do with the issue. Not everyone pays taxes and some who do pay taxes, such as children, don't get to vote. That is really not a relevant part of the discussion.

I realize one polotical party has a vested interest in having convicted felons vote.

 

What income are these felons using to pay these taxes? I was under the impression that these felons were working for about 10 cents a day--barely enough to buy a ho ho or a single cigabutt when they get the chance. But in answer to your question...no they shouldn't be allowed to vote.

 

What would be your reason?? They do still pay taxes they served thier time, just saying no is a waste. Why did you even post here.

 

I think you have to differentiate between violent and non violent felonies. If you committed a violent felony, say killing someone while drinking and driving, you already took away someones right to vote forever, I can see you losing yours forever. Voter fraud that would have to be forever, (wether voter fraud is a large issue or not is irrelevant). I think you have to be careful with who you allow to get back their rights to vote, freedom in America is sacrosanct and taking freedoms away from another should be dealt with harshly.

I think the issue in this thread is really about what should and what should not be a felony.

 

While a felon is in prison...no.

Thereafter....once a person has paid his debt to society... I have no problem with it.

Once they are back in society their rights should be restored.

 

I see and agree with the points you made, it makes total sence. However, if the felon has served his/her debt to society then why should they continue to feed their money and not have thier voice heard. I am being very blanket in my arguement but I am trying to grasp the concept of seeing the other side of the issue.

 

I am fine with their voting after they finish their parole.

Violent felons should still not be allowed to own weapons again, even for hunting, even if they are pardoned.

 

After they serve thier time, pay thier fees and are all done with the system sure.

 

Didn't anyone ever watch Bonanza? Once you paid your debt, you should be incorporated back into society.

A 19 year old hit me on my bicycle and drove away. Hit and run. I can still have him arrested for felony hit and run within the next 2 years. If he pays for my damages I won't but I suppose he could not vote if I did.

 

I find it very difficult to form a final opinion . The previous Poster essentially echoes what I think .
I believe completion of a sentence wipes the slate clean . The fact that some argue that the original sentence is wrong or unjust does not impress me .
The Law must be obeyed as it stands , for good or otherwise .If it is judged wrong , then change it through democratic process .
The type of offence is also irrelevant , imho . I believe the sentence reflect Societies current position , and until it is also officially changed , other or increased punishment is a matter for God and the criminal's conscience to deal with .
I think that Voting rights should be suspended until a person leaves prison . It might seem unjust that the same rule applies for a horrific crime as for a fines dodger serving a few weeks only . But the differences in punishment sentence times allow for precisely that .
Or would , in a perfectly just world . imho .

 

I believe that a person should have the right to vote wether they are a felon or not also just a note they are still effected by what goes on in the outside world and in most cases they will be returning to the outside world once they have paid their debt to society. I don't think stripping them of their right to vote does anything. I mean what is the voter participation at anyway right now?

The whole point of going to prison is you are paying a debt to society by losing most of your rights. I mean their are few rights for those who are locked up as it should be they did something to get in there. You don't get free speech in prison the same way you do when you are in public. You don't get do do whatever you want in prison. It is a very rights restrictive environment which it needs to be to keep everyone as safe as you can when you lock people up who could be mentally ill or have issues that they need to work through if they want to never come back again.

When you release someone from prison they are suppose to be better or ready to go back into society. I understand limiting their gun rights or not allowing them to own a gun because they committed a crime with a gun or it was a violent crime. That I understand but saying that they no longer get a say in the country is a very serious thing and isn't something to take lightly because what you are saying is that they have made a mistake and even after they paid their debt they are never allowed to have a say in what happens in the country. That is extremely harsh.

Also a note this could effect kids. As in many states minors are able to be charged as adults for things like sending naked pics of themselves to another teen. The Crime is the Creation, Distribution of Child Pornography which is considered a violent Felony. This would strip them of their rights to vote forever. Which is more than a little harsh considering in these cases there is generally no actual victim to speak of as they both consented to this. The tough on crime stuff doesn't work and hasn't worked for the several decades now that we have had it in place.

 

This is an issue for the Courts as the Courts are the authority for the denial of Rights of the Individual. It is true that conditions such as losing the Right to Keep and Bear Arms and the Right to Vote may be codified into the laws as well as sentencing guidelines for certain offenses and it's the Courts and the authority of the Courts that enforce the laws.

Upon completion of the term of a sentence for a felony a person can file a petition with the court to have Rights, such as the Right to Keep and Bear Arms or the Right to Vote reinstated. The Courts, or sometimes adminstrative agencies of the State, can order this based upon a hearing of the issue. Many felons have had both the Right to Vote and their Right to Keep and Bear Arms reinstated by the Courts in the US based upon such a petition. The belief that these Rights cannot be restored are false and generally it the failure of the individual to ever petition for these Rights to be restored that is the problem. Each State has laws related to this generally depending on the crime.

http://www.blurtit.com/q8454035.html

 

no, we got enough criminals in office, we dont need their brethren voting for them as well.

 

How many THOUSANDS of cases have been overturned years after conviction? This means innocent people were denied their rights through no fault of their own.

 

If they're out of jail, and served their time, let them vote.

 

In virtually all cases there are provisions that allow them to re-establish their voting rights so this really isn't an issue.

 

Correction: it can take many years to overturn wrongful convictions. This means innocent people will have been wrongfully deprived of their rights for extended periods. As always, it is minorities who are the chief victims of wrongful convictions so where is the fairness to them?

 

"Should convicted felons be able to vote."

I have no problem with them losing rights while doing their time, but once they have completed their time, they should be able to vote, carry a gun, freedom of speech, whatever rights everyone else has, they should have as well


.

 

Based on the comments it's obvious that a lot of people believe in eternal punishment.

You would think that since this country blabs about the concept of freedom and liberty that people would be able to put those ideas into practice. Instead they want to impose a repressive regime that excludes their fellow citizens from participating in the political affairs of the country just because they were convicted of a crime of some sort.

For those who don't know it Vermont and Maine allow all prisoners to vote unless they have comitted voter fraud. http://www.rrstar.com/news/x635406498/Vermont-Maine-allow-inmates-to-vote

http://www.seattleweekly.com/2010-01-13/news/voting-from-prison-not-so-hard-after-all/

http://blogs.seattleweekly.com/dailyweekly/2010/01/federal_court_rules_that_washi.php

http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2010/10/18/supreme-court-deals-blow-to-mass-inmates-seeking-right-to-vote/

Naturally, the Repubs want to deny everyone except for themselves the right to vote. They'll even prohibit their mothers from voting if they thought that could get away with it.

 

Looks like the left is scraping the bottom of the barrel for voters, again!

Democrats don't care who votes, as long as the vote for their party.