Position check!!!

[Tiger Al 0]

Do you feel that felons, once fully adjudicated, should have their right to vote in elections restored? Currently, the states of Alabama, Delaware, Florida, Iowa, Kentucky, Mississippi, Nevada, New Mexico, Virginia and Wyoming, permanently prohibit voting rights for felons.

I think that once a person has "paid his or her debt to society" voting rights should be restored, as I feel that by not doing so it, in effect, forces them into a sort of taxation without representation scenario.

What do you think?

[Donutboy 0]

Do you feel that felons, once fully adjudicated, should have their right to vote in elections restored? Currently, the states of Alabama, Delaware, Florida, Iowa, Kentucky, Mississippi, Nevada, New Mexico, Virginia and Wyoming, permanently prohibit voting rights for felons.

I think that once a person has "paid his or her debt to society" voting rights should be restored, as I feel that by not doing so it, in effect, forces them into a sort of taxation without representation scenario.

What do you think?

Actually, the voting rights for felons in Alabama isn't a lifetime ban. There's just months of paperwork that they have to go through to get their voting rights re-instated. In the past year, the state legislation tried to eliminate that paperwork and mandate that a felon's voting rights became automatically restored when he had served his time. Republican Governor Bob Riley, supposed proponent of less government, decided that all of the extra paperwork was necessary and vetoed the legislation. I'm sure that he'd prefer former felons didn't get their voting rights back at all, but if they do, he wants to make it as hard as possible. Personally, I believe that once someone has paid their debt to society, they should have all of their rights restored...... UNLESS restoring that right puts someone else in danger, such as a sex offender who is required to register whenever he moves into a new community.

[MDM4AU 337]

I am torn a bit. Mostly, I feel that once their sentence and probation have been served they should immediately be reinstated. JMHO.

[Tiger Al 0]

Yes, you are correct, but it excludes felons found guilty of murder, rape, sodomy and sex abuse. I think that once a person has fully paid his debt, no matter the crime, his voting rights should be reinstated.

[Donutboy 0]

Yes, you are correct, but it excludes felons found guilty of murder, rape, sodomy and sex abuse. I think that once a person has fully paid his debt, no matter the crime, his voting rights should be reinstated.

If that's true, I agree. I see no danger to anyone in allowing ANYONE who has served their full sentence and made full restitution for their crime from becoming an active, voting member of society again, except for the exceptions that I feel are essential, as stated in prior post. I don't have a problem with a sex offender being able to vote when he gets out of jail. I just want to know if he's living in my neighborhood or is around my children.

[War Eagle 96 10]

I believe that individuals convicted of violent felonies should be shot on the courthouse steps. We would not, in that case, have to worry about voting rights for them.

All others convicted of felonies should neve have the right to vote.

I also believe individuals that cannot be described by at least one of the following should not be able to vote:

1) I am currently employed and am paying income taxes (not just payroll taxes).

2) I do not receive welfare.

3) I am a member of the US armed forces.

4) I own property.

5) I have never been convicted of a felony.

6) I am 21 years old.

I'm sure I could think of more ways to "qualify."

[TrueBlue72 0]

Fully paying one's debt includes the loss of voting priviledges, not just the time spend in prison. Its part of the payment!

We need to stop coddling criminals and make serving time so unpleasant that NO ONE would ever do anything to put themselves back behind bars a second time.

If they didn't want to lose their voting rights, they should not have committed the crime..... is that really so difficult a concept?

[rexbo 104]

I don't think if you have murdered someone, you should EVER get your voting rights back; the person you killed will never vote again, so neither should you.

[AUloggerhead 2,356]

NO Voting Rights restored! A very basic principle applies here: Ignorance of the law is no excuse.

If a potential felon is so concerned about retaining his/her voting rights (notice I didn't say privilege or entitlement,) then maybe he/she should have thought twice before committing the crime. A compromise proposal: during the teaching of 8th grade Civics, have all public school teachers hammer home the point that your right to vote is lost forever with any felony conviction. Get to kids early enough with a suitable warning & them let them make their "choice."

[Tigermike 3,425]

A compromise proposal: during the teaching of 8th grade Civics, have all public school teachers hammer home the point that your right to vote is lost forever with any felony conviction. Get to kids early enough with a suitable warning & them let them make their "choice."

That may be a good thing to teach and even very good for teachers to point out with emphasis. But when people are in the process of contemplating criminal behavior, I doubt seriously if they will ever think of their right to vote.

I also doubt that when they are caught and being taken to jail by the police that they will be thinking, "Darn I wont be able to vote again if I am convicted!".

[Donutboy 0]

NO Voting Rights restored! A very basic principle applies here: Ignorance of the law is no excuse.

If a potential felon is so concerned about retaining his/her voting rights (notice I didn't say privilege or entitlement,) then maybe he/she should have thought twice before committing the crime. A compromise proposal: during the teaching of 8th grade Civics, have all public school teachers hammer home the point that your right to vote is lost forever with any felony conviction. Get to kids early enough with a suitable warning & them let them make their "choice."

Yeah. It's worked so well with the "Just Say No To Drugs" policy, it's bound to stop all criminal activity. I'll bet the political right will change their tunes on this issue if Rush Limbaugh's voting rights became endangered over his purported illegal drug activity.

I DO agree on the point that rexbo made though. In the case of murder, where you've taken someone else's voting rights away, you should NEVER get your voting rights back. Of course, if it were me, someone who committed murder would never see the light of day again, much less worry about whether they could vote again.

[Tiger Al 0]

Wow!!! It sounds like most of you believe that when a person makes a mistake and is punished for it, he still has to pay for that mistake in some form or fashion until death. That seems overly harsh to me because it would appear that there can never be true forgiveness for a crime.

[texaubie 0]

Should a convicted murderer then be given the right to own firearms after he has served his time in prison?

Should a convicted child molester be allowed to run a boy scout group or coach the middle school volley ball team?

I think all they are saying is that the loss of voting PRIVILEDGES is a part of the punishment that goes beyond jail time.

[Donutboy 0]

Should a convicted murderer then be given the right to own firearms after he has served his time in prison?

Should a convicted child molester be allowed to run a boy scout group or coach the middle school volley ball team?

I think all they are saying is that the loss of voting PRIVILEDGES is a part of the punishment that goes beyond jail time.

If there is a valid reason for refusing to grant a right back to someone who has served his time, I'm all for it. I don't think it's in the public's best interests to allow certain rights back to certain individuals. A child molester should never be able to hold a job that would give him access to children. Anyone that commits a "gun crime", murder, armed robbery or such, should never have the right to own or possess another weapon. However, I don't see where it's in the public good to continue denying voting rights to someone who has paid their debt to society.

[texaubie 0]

I understand and really don't think it matters one way or the other. What I think matters is sticking to the "rules". If the law says that if you commit a felony, then you lose your priviledge to vote for life then we should stick to it. For the same reason that I don't think it matters, I don't see a reason to change the law.

Why don't we give the convicts an option. If you provide 2000 hours of community service above your court ordered sentence, then you can have your voting priviledges re-instated? I'd be all for that. If not, why do you, in effect, want to reduce the punishment for the criminals.

[Donutboy 0]

I understand and really don't think it matters one way or the other. What I think matters is sticking to the "rules". If the law says that if you commit a felony, then you lose your priviledge to vote for life then we should stick to it. For the same reason that I don't think it matters, I don't see a reason to change the law.

Why don't we give the convicts an option. If you provide 2000 hours of community service above your court ordered sentence, then you can have your voting priviledges re-instated? I'd be all for that. If not, why do you, in effect, want to reduce the punishment for the criminals.

Most felons already are able to get their voting rights restored but have to endure months of exhaustive paperwork. Our state legislature, under pressure to reduce state costs, tried to eliminate the bureaucratic paperwork and give inmates their voting rights back automatically when they completed their sentence. If they can already get their rights restored, why not eliminate the administration costs?

[Jenny AU-92 0]

We have had this discussion before, and I will repeat my position from the past thread: people who commit felonies and go to jail are seldom registered voters. The threat of losing their voter registration is not exactly high on their list of worries. I see this as a moot point. Take away something they give a rat's patootie about.

So I guess I would come out on the side of don't give them back without all the paperwork, as most really don't care whether they have the right to vote or not, and the few that do care about it will go to the time and effort to get them restored.

[Tiger Al 0]

Should a convicted murderer then be given the right to own firearms after he has served his time in prison?

Should a convicted child molester be allowed to run a boy scout group or coach the middle school volley ball team?

I think all they are saying is that the loss of voting PRIVILEDGES is a part of the punishment that goes beyond jail time.

With all due respect, firearm ownership and Boy Scouts weren't the subject of the question. Those things would, obviously, have different considerations associated with them.

Voting is a right in this country, not a privilage, and I think that the right to vote is fundamental to the participation in citizenship of this country. While a person is under legal sanctions for committing a crime, then I think it's fair to abbridge his voting rights. But, once that person has fulfilled his obligation to the law by serving the ascribed prison time, paying monetary fines and completing probation, he should then be allowed, as a citizen of the US, to vote again.

By denying that right, it is, I think, a form of taxation without representation because he can never have a voice in choosing who his political leaders and lawmakers are.

Jenny, whether or not someone exercises any right has no bearing on whether or not that right should be protected or nullified. Because I choose not to own a gun doesn't nullify my right to own one.

[texaubie 0]

Sorry Al. I was just responding to this post:

Wow!!! It sounds like most of you believe that when a person makes a mistake and is punished for it, he still has to pay for that mistake in some form or fashion until death. That seems overly harsh to me because it would appear that there can never be true forgiveness for a crime.

I took this to mean that you believe once a person has served his time he should be given back all of his original rights as a US citizen which includes voting, firearm ownership and such. I know some people that would take the loss of their firearms worse than the loss of their priviledge to vote.

[Tiger Al 0]

Sorry Al. I was just responding to this post:

Wow!!! It sounds like most of you believe that when a person makes a mistake and is punished for it, he still has to pay for that mistake in some form or fashion until death. That seems overly harsh to me because it would appear that there can never be true forgiveness for a crime.

I took this to mean that you believe once a person has served his time he should be given back all of his original rights as a US citizen which includes voting, firearm ownership and such. I know some people that would take the loss of their firearms worse than the loss of their priviledge to vote.

It's ok, texaubie, I just wanted to keep the water from becoming unduly muddy!!! The statement I made was regarding voting rights but I was a little unclear in that. Sorry.

[War Eagle 96 10]

I just wanted to keep the water from becoming unduly muddy!!!

Doesn't muddying the waters define a liberal?

[Tigermike 3,425]

I just wanted to keep the water from becoming unduly muddy!!!

Doesn't muddying the waters define a liberal?

You get todays award for most insightful post of the day!

[CCTAU 3,369]

Fully paying one's debt includes the loss of voting priviledges, not just the time spend in prison. Its part of the payment!

We need to stop coddling criminals and make serving time so unpleasant that NO ONE would ever do anything to put themselves back behind bars a second time.

If they didn't want to lose their voting rights, they should not have committed the crime..... is that really so difficult a concept?

Bravo. Well said. And if they ar to get it back, it should be very hard. That way they will KNOW what its like to have to work for the right and privilege to vote. I think it is currently 7 years in GA.

[rexbo 104]

Interesting (conservative) article on felons voting. I have a question, which comes first, do you commit the crime first and then become a Democrat, or do Democrats commit most of the crimes? (Clinton was a Democrat before he committed perjury, that is one data point.)

The Felon Franchise

...a study by sociologists Christopher Uggen of the University of Minnesota and Jeff Manza of Northwestern shows that felons vote overwhelmingly for Democrats — at a rate approaching 70 percent. (In fact, this estimate may be low. In some Florida counties more than 80 percent of the felons who voted illegally were registered Democrats.) Therefore, had Florida's felons voted in the 2000 presidential election at a rate comparable to the rest of the Florida electorate, Al Gore would have won the state by more than 60,000 votes.

The restoration of voting rights to felons is decidedly unpopular with the electorate. For example, in 1998, more than 80 percent of Utah voters approved a measure to bar inmates from voting. In 2000, the Massachusetts electorate, among the most liberal in the country, voted for a constitutional amendment barring felon inmates from voting.

[Tiger Al 0]

The restoration of voting rights to felons is decidedly unpopular with the electorate. For example, in 1998, more than 80 percent of Utah voters approved a measure to bar inmates from voting. In 2000, the Massachusetts electorate, among the most liberal in the country, voted for a constitutional amendment barring felon inmates from voting.

We weren't talking about current inmates, though. I would agree that prisoners and those out of prison but currently on parole should still be disallowed to vote.