• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Should Ex-Felons Get to Vote?

Should Ex-Felons Be Allowed to Vote?

  • No, Not One of the Them

    Votes: 7 29.2%
  • Yes, Any and All of Them,

    Votes: 9 37.5%
  • Yes, For selected offences

    Votes: 7 29.2%
  • Yes, After a "Waiting Period".

    Votes: 1 4.2%

  • Total voters
    24

MSgt

Stabler Genius
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 10, 2005
Messages
26,272
Reaction score
11,627
Location
Highlands Ranch, CO
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Deegan said:
I think it depends on the charge, was it a serious felony, was anyones life changed for the worse, was it the first offense, etc. I don't see why this can not be reviewed, and it would appear that most states have some sort of review board for this very issue. I think it could be used to gage the persons commitment to being a useful, responsible citizen once again, I am all for taking it case by case, and I didn't always feel this way.


Good point. The way I see it, prison is for the punishment of the criminal and for the protection of the public. "Rehabilitation" should definately be a concept within the prison walls. However, this word isn't taken serious. It is a concept at best. If our society were to ever give this word some merit, then our society should recognize that ex-cons should be afforded the opportunity to "earn" his full rights back as a law abiding citizen. A simple 6 year sentence served in prison doesn't cut it.
 

Scarecrow Akhbar

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 22, 2005
Messages
11,430
Reaction score
2,282
Location
Los Angeles
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
GySgt said:
It's not about debt. There should be repercussions for breaking some laws other than a stint in prison. Felons are not supposed to purchase fire arms. This too is a repercussion.


The practical reason for not wanting ex-felons to own firearms is apparent.

What's the practical reason for not letting him vote?

Please, in your answer, expend some effort to make sense.
 

DocAR

Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2005
Messages
74
Reaction score
1
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
The practical reason for not wanting ex-felons to own firearms is apparent.

What's the practical reason for not letting him vote?

Please, in your answer, expend some effort to make sense.

If the person in question is a felon, convicted of a non-violent crime, what is the practical reason that they shoudln't be able to own firearms?

For that matter, what is the practical reason that a felon should be allowed to vote?
 

Scarecrow Akhbar

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 22, 2005
Messages
11,430
Reaction score
2,282
Location
Los Angeles
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
DocAR said:
If the person in question is a felon, convicted of a non-violent crime, what is the practical reason that they shoudln't be able to own firearms?

As a matter of bureaucratic simplicity, they don't discriminate between a felony rape or a felony embezzlement. The convicted rapist is far more likely to cause harm with a firearm, but the embezzler might decide that more direct methods of stealing money are preferred, too. But mostly it's so the state doesn't have to bog down the permitting process with criminal record searches.

DocAR said:
For that matter, what is the practical reason that a felon should be allowed to vote?

The prohibition on firearms is part of an effort to protect the public. Since the most dangerous criminal participating in an election has his name on the ballot, its not obvious at all what harm an ex-felon's vote could do.
 

MSgt

Stabler Genius
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 10, 2005
Messages
26,272
Reaction score
11,627
Location
Highlands Ranch, CO
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
The practical reason for not wanting ex-felons to own firearms is apparent.

What's the practical reason for not letting him vote?

Please, in your answer, expend some effort to make sense.


Post #76.

The way I see it, prison is for the punishment of the criminal and for the protection of the public. "Rehabilitation" should definately be a concept within the prison walls. However, this word isn't taken serious. It is a concept at best. If our society were to ever give this word some merit, then our society should recognize that ex-cons should be afforded the opportunity to "earn" his full rights back as a law abiding citizen. A simple 6 year sentence served in prison doesn't cut it.

It's a repercussion and a penalty. That's about all there is to it.
 

DocAR

Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2005
Messages
74
Reaction score
1
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
As a matter of bureaucratic simplicity, they don't discriminate between a felony rape or a felony embezzlement. The convicted rapist is far more likely to cause harm with a firearm, but the embezzler might decide that more direct methods of stealing money are preferred, too. But mostly it's so the state doesn't have to bog down the permitting process with criminal record searches.

Bureaucratic simplicity?????

If that's not an oxymoran, I don't know what IS.

If a felony is an important enought offence to ban one from ownership of firearms (a Contuitionally-protected right) then why would it NOT be important enough to have consquences on your other rights?

A felony is no small matter. I supose your voting rights are suspended because you have shown a lack of judgement on a sufficent scale to disqualify you from voting in elections that will help deturmine the future of the country. Decisions such as those are hardly the type I want being made by common criminals.

"Bog down the system with criminal record searches".

Like the ones you currently have to go through in order to buy a firearm? (and they DO look at specific offences)

Good thing we avoided that fiasco. (BTW- I usually pass in less than 2 minutes. Not much of a draw on the system)

The prohibition on firearms is part of an effort to protect the public. Since the most dangerous criminal participating in an election has his name on the ballot, its not obvious at all what harm an ex-felon's vote could do.


The prohibition on voting is very likely for the exact same reason.

The cheap shot at Bush (I assume), though. Cute. Very cute. I suppose you're of the mind that only a few more felon voters couls have put that "nice Mr Kerry" in to office, eh?

I'll restate my previous position: If voting and gun ownership are THAT important to you, don't commit a felony. Easiest way in the world to retain theses rights, period.
 

Thorgasm

Bus Driver to Hell
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 4, 2005
Messages
69,516
Reaction score
15,437
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Shuamort, Who was your debate coach?
 

Scarecrow Akhbar

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 22, 2005
Messages
11,430
Reaction score
2,282
Location
Los Angeles
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
An update on the situation in Mary Land.

Ehrlich to veto bill on felons

Ehrlich to veto bill on felons
By S.A. Miller
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
February 15, 2006


ANNAPOLIS -- Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr. yesterday vowed to veto a bill that would restore voting rights to felons, including the state's most violent criminals, immediately upon their release from prison.
"I don't think you reward the franchise to those who commit the most horrific crimes," Mr. Ehrlich, a Republican, told The Washington Times. "Full restoration of every right is inappropriate."
Dozens of House Democrats have co-sponsored legislation that would allow about 150,000 murderers, rapists, robbers and other felons to vote this year, and the state Democratic Party has endorsed the bill.
The bill's lead sponsor -- Delegate Salima Siler Marriott, Baltimore Democrat -- said yesterday that Mr. Ehrlich's position reinforces the racist underpinnings of the state law that denies the vote to felons, of whom about 85,000 are black.
Mrs. Marriott, who is black, said Mr. Ehrlich's sentiment "reflects the thinking" of Carter Glass, a delegate to the Virginia Constitutional Convention of 1901 who said felon disenfranchisement aims to "eliminate the darkie as a political factor."
"We all were raised in a racist society," said Mrs. Marriott, stressing that she was not calling Mr. Ehrlich a racist. "Let us be clear about what were the intentions of these laws."
Mr. Ehrlich said he would not "indulge her" by responding to her comments.
"There are white felons. Every issue isn't a racial issue around here," said the governor, who is seeking re-election.
Democratic lawmakers have attributed the Marriott bill's popularity to their party's aim to oust Mr. Ehrlich and secure black votes after Lt. Gov. Michael S. Steele, a Republican, in 2002 became the first black to win statewide office in Maryland.

...

So it doesn't look like the side in favor of restoring the franchise to felons is capable of discussing their idea rationally. Being Democrats, they've already played their Race of Spades card and are sitting back expecting the Republicans to run away and the media to come flocking in adulation.

Glad I found this article, I'd gotten tired of the Shuamort/Shoot ******* match and left. I see a post I should respond to...
 

Goobieman

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 2, 2006
Messages
17,343
Reaction score
2,876
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
An update on the situation in Mary Land.
So it doesn't look like the side in favor of restoring the franchise to felons is capable of discussing their idea rationally. Being Democrats, they've already played their Race of Spades card and are sitting back expecting the Republicans to run away and the media to come flocking in adulation.
As far as the Dems playing the race card - what happens when you cry wolf?

States have the power to deprive felons of voting rights. That most felons are people of color in no way necessitates that the exercise of this power is based on the desire to disenfranchise people of color.

Glad I found this article, I'd gotten tired of the Shuamort/Shoot ******* match and left. I see a post I should respond to...
So, who banned Shuamort?
 

Scarecrow Akhbar

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 22, 2005
Messages
11,430
Reaction score
2,282
Location
Los Angeles
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
DocAR said:
If a felony is an important enought offence to ban one from ownership of firearms (a Contuitionally-protected right) then why would it NOT be important enough to have consquences on your other rights?

A felony is no small matter. I supose your voting rights are suspended because you have shown a lack of judgement on a sufficent scale to disqualify you from voting in elections that will help deturmine the future of the country. Decisions such as those are hardly the type I want being made by common criminals.

A felony is any crime carrying a punishment of one year in jail or greater.

The voting system makes no distinctions between felonies, it only notes the presence of one on the record. For the purposes of this discussion, I don't plan on making such distinctions, either.

The question, IMO, is that of rehabilitation. If they're rehabilitated, explain why they cannot vote. If, as you say, lack of judgement is a criteria for restricting the franchise, why haven't we taken the vote away from those that put Clinton and Bush into office?

DocAR said:
"Bog down the system with criminal record searches".

Like the ones you currently have to go through in order to buy a firearm? (and they DO look at specific offences)

Good thing we avoided that fiasco. (BTW- I usually pass in less than 2 minutes. Not much of a draw on the system)

Yeah, bog down the system. There's a hundred million voters in the country. Why waste the time or the money when there's no point in the exclusion anyway?

DocAR said:
The prohibition on voting is very likely for the exact same reason.

Yeah, I can see it now. A man runs into the liquor store and waves his voter registration card shouting "this is a stick up!"

DocAR said:
The cheap shot at Bush (I assume), though. Cute. Very cute. I suppose you're of the mind that only a few more felon voters couls have put that "nice Mr Kerry" in to office, eh?

I see thinking isn't your strong point. Looks like you didn't score well on the reading comprehension portions of the SAT, either.

I'll restate my previous position: If voting and gun ownership are THAT important to you, don't commit a felony. Easiest way in the world to retain theses rights, period.[/QUOTE]
 

Datamonkee

Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2005
Messages
216
Reaction score
2
Location
Orlando, Florida
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I say why the hell not? They can't hose up the government any more than the criminals that we have in office have. Hell, they'd probably do better.
 

Scarecrow Akhbar

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 22, 2005
Messages
11,430
Reaction score
2,282
Location
Los Angeles
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Goobieman said:
As far as the Dems playing the race card - what happens when you cry wolf?

States have the power to deprive felons of voting rights. That most felons are people of color in no way necessitates that the exercise of this power is based on the desire to disenfranchise people of color.

I know that. It doesn't mean that it wasn't it's purpose, though, either. That hasn't been proven this thread by any means.

Let's face it. IMO the Democrats are making an issue of the felon vote because they're presuming that since the majority of these people are black that they'll be getting more voters. They're not doing this out of any love of humanity, of course not. I'm not gullible.

The Democrats always play the race card. I don't think their constituency is capable of thought, so they jump straight for the emotion buttons.

But that doesn't mean the issue doesn't have it's own merits.
 

Goobieman

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 2, 2006
Messages
17,343
Reaction score
2,876
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
I know that. It doesn't mean that it wasn't it's purpose, though, either. That hasn't been proven this thread by any means.

Let's face it. IMO the Democrats are making an issue of the felon vote because they're presuming that since the majority of these people are black that they'll be getting more voters. They're not doing this out of any love of humanity, of course not. I'm not gullible.

The Democrats always play the race card. I don't think their constituency is capable of thought, so they jump straight for the emotion buttons.

But that doesn't mean the issue doesn't have it's own merits.

Well... sifting through the thread, it seems the claim was that laws that prevent felons from voting were/are intended to disenfranchice people of color, and therefore violate the 15th amendment. THAT claim has not been proven. Absent any support for that claim, there's no 15th amendment argument, and so the state laws that do disenfranchise felons stand.

Its easy to claim intentional discimination - its hard to prove. Liberal Democrats feel that the accusation is proof enough, I guess.
 

Scarecrow Akhbar

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 22, 2005
Messages
11,430
Reaction score
2,282
Location
Los Angeles
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Goobieman said:
Well... sifting through the thread, it seems the claim was that laws that prevent felons from voting were/are intended to disenfranchice people of color, and therefore violate the 15th amendment. THAT claim has not been proven. Absent any support for that claim, there's no 15th amendment argument, and so the state laws that do disenfranchise felons stand.

Its easy to claim intentional discimination - its hard to prove. Liberal Democrats feel that the accusation is proof enough, I guess.

Like I said, it wasn't proven here. Not yet, anyway. At the same time, look at the era when such laws were passed. It's not unreasonable that disenfranchisement of blacks could be a motive in the passage of those laws at that time, either.

And, well, absent any valid reason for disenfranchising people when even the most incompetent voter needs only be a citizen older than his 18th birthday, and we have to start wondering why those laws against ex-felons are on the books.
 

libertarian_knight

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
997
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
George_Washington said:
Yes, they've served their time but we're talking about felonies here, not just petty misdemeanors. We're talking about letting mentally ill and sick people have a say in how our government is run. I don't they should have a voice as to keep our political system as efficient as possible.

Given how many hundreds of thousands, or millions, of NON-VIOLENT, non-property offense, felony convictions there are in the united states, and most of the non-violent offenses being drug possession or trafficking, it's stupid to list them all together.

Of the 1,000,000 or so convictions in the US in 1996 (sorry, only info I could find at the moment on the Bureau of Justice Statistics website), nearly 1/2 were NON-VIOLENT, Non-property offenses.

What's more, of course, is that if all these people could not vote, they would not be allowed to effect change in the law that put them in prison.

It makes no sense to make it that people harmed by the law, can not affect the law, but people who benefit from the abuse of law, can benefit.

IRS agents are theives, but they can vote.

Either universal sufferage is universal, or it's not. If it's not, let's exclude people who recieve ANY PUBLIC MONEY/special serivce from the voter rolls. That means welfare moms, prisoners, farmers taking subsidy, contractors working for the state, government suppliers, etc.

If someone takes money or special service from the government, they can't vote, especially any kind of transfer payment or government contract.
 

fooligan

Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2006
Messages
170
Reaction score
0
Location
G.R. MI
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
shuamort said:
In Minnesota, shoplifting over $300 of merchandise is a felony.


I don't know current Michigan law, but back in 1981 I broke a window valued (way) over $100. That was enough for a felony charge (my first and last criminal offense). The judge gave me six months. I turned 18 about two weeks after I was released. Served 5 months.

Forget the circumstances, obviously I didn't give society at large a great first impression, and I accept resposibility for what I did and I'm not complaining. I'm just saying, sometimes people mess up and turn do themselves around. ;)
 

jamesrage

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
35,840
Reaction score
17,337
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
Read today that Maryland Democrats are trolling for votes in the sewage treatment plant settling tanks:

Maryland Dems Want to Give Ex-Felons the Vote


So, should ex-felons be allowed to vote?

We got politicians catering and kissing the asses of special interest groups and foriegners instead of the American voters.I do not want politicians running round promising to put a XBOX or PS2 in every cell to get votes.I do not want politicians running around promising to put a water park in every prison to get votes from potential repeat degenerates.

So I say no,I do not want potential repeat offenders to be a voting base for any politician.
 

Stinger

DP Veteran
Joined
May 3, 2005
Messages
15,154
Reaction score
565
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
shuamort said:
I voted yes. They've served their time. Moreover, it seems unconstitutional that some states allow ex-felons to vote for national elections and some states don't.

The states are given the explict authority to do whatever they want as far as national elections. There is not even a right to vote in national elections, the state legislature can select electors if they want to.
 

Stinger

DP Veteran
Joined
May 3, 2005
Messages
15,154
Reaction score
565
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
hipsterdufus said:
OJ can vote, but in some states convicted felons can't.
After they serve their time, I would say yes.
Some states even let felons in prison vote.
Felons are citizens of this country as much as someone with a 20 IQ or the hate mongers from godhatesfags.com.

Why is this a states / rather than federal issue? Just curious.

Then should they be allowed to own a gun which is an explict right?
 

Goobieman

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 2, 2006
Messages
17,343
Reaction score
2,876
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Stinger said:
The states are given the explict authority to do whatever they want as far as national elections. There is not even a right to vote in national elections, the state legislature can select electors if they want to.

There are no national elections, only state elections.

And states have almost plenary power to decide who can vote in these elections -- so long as they do not afoul of the various amendments.
 

Scarecrow Akhbar

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 22, 2005
Messages
11,430
Reaction score
2,282
Location
Los Angeles
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
jamesrage said:
We got politicians catering and kissing the asses of special interest groups and foriegners instead of the American voters.I do not want politicians running round promising to put a XBOX or PS2 in every cell to get votes.I do not want politicians running around promising to put a water park in every prison to get votes from potential repeat degenerates.

So I say no,I do not want potential repeat offenders to be a voting base for any politician.

"Ex-Felons", not guys who list their address *** Cell Block B.
 

jamesrage

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
35,840
Reaction score
17,337
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
"Ex-Felons", not guys who list their address *** Cell Block B.
Ex-felons are potential repeat offenders.If I was one of these degenerates I would most likely vote for someone who favors turning prison into country clubs.Because if I was one of these degenerates I would have to consider the possibility that I could wind up back in prison even though my intentions would be to never return to prison.
 

fooligan

Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2006
Messages
170
Reaction score
0
Location
G.R. MI
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
jamesrage said:
Ex-felons are potential repeat offenders.If I was one of these degenerates I would most likely vote for someone who favors turning prison into country clubs.Because if I was one of these degenerates I would have to consider the possibility that I could wind up back in prison even though my intentions would be to never return to prison.

Hey asshole, I'm an ex-felon. Bite my degenerating ***.
 

Stinger

DP Veteran
Joined
May 3, 2005
Messages
15,154
Reaction score
565
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
fooligan said:
Hey asshole, I'm an ex-felon. Bite my degenerating ***.

And before you committed your felony did you know that you would lose your voting privilages if you committed one?
 
Top Bottom