NationStates Jolt Archive

In the United States of America, some states deny convicted felons the right to vote in local, state and federal elections.

Do you believe this is right? If so, why? If not, why?

I think, while they are incarcerated, they should be denied the right to vote as further punishment for their crimes, but once they have served their time, they should regain that right.

I would have to agree with Sdaeriji, serve your time then become refranchised.

It seems to me that a person who has no say regarding what laws there are, (through their elected representative) is not going to have much respect for what laws already exist.

I would agree, of course, that nobody who is in jail or prison should vote...but other than that, the committing of a crime, however serious, should not prevent a person from exercising a basic right once their debt to society is paid.

I think, while they are incarcerated, they should be denied the right to vote as further punishment for their crimes, but once they have served their time, they should regain that right.

Why do you think that they should be banned from voting as a punishment?

I personally think that, even while in jail, felons should get the right to vote. But I would be willing to change my mind if anyone had a good reason for them not to vote.

Why do you think that they should be banned from voting as a punishment?

I personally think that, even while in jail, felons should get the right to vote. But I would be willing to change my mind if anyone had a good reason for them not to vote.

I know I don't have any facts to back me up, but it seems to me that if felons were allowed to vote, then that would be a huge voting block that could be pandered to by lowering prison times for various crimes.

I definitely think they should get their right to vote back once they've served their sentence. I've even thought about the possibility of them voting while still serving the sentence. Part of me doesn't really like the idea, but maybe they could have some say in the horrendous prison conditions in this country. But I suppose letting them vote after the sentence is served would serve the same purpose.

I know I don't have any facts to back me up, but it seems to me that if felons were allowed to vote, then that would be a huge voting block that could be pandered to by lowering prison times for various crimes.

I see what you are saying, but two problems I have:

1) Any politician pandering to felons are going to lose much more votes than they would gain.

2) I don't think felons are going to look out for the rights of other felons.

But I don't know, I guess since a convict has shown he doesn't respect the laws of society then he should have no hand in dictating them.

This is a good topic, it will certainly require more thinking than I can muster at 3:00 am.

I don't really see why they shouldn't be allowed to vote during & after their sentence.

Here in Australia voting is compulsary. In or out of jail you will be fined if you do not vote on election day (unless you have a good excuse or vote before the election).

Once convicted under due process a person can be deprived of any rights they had as a citizen (though not as a human), so permanent deprivation of the right to vote as a part of the punishment is perfectly legal. In fact it is still rather gracious of those states/people to only take that, since they are not obligated to recognize felons as citizens at all.

I personally would be willing to support a probationary period where you definately cannot vote (5-10 years). Then after that period you can appeal to be able to vote. A sort of good behavior system. It would of course require some sort of board or hearing where the felon's PO, among others should testify on the matter. If you can prove you have been a model citizen/member of the community, you can have your right to vote back.

Once convicted under due process a person can be deprived of any rights they had as a citizen (though not as a human), so permanent deprivation of the right to vote as a part of the punishment is perfectly legal. In fact it is still rather gracious of those states/people to only take that, since they are not obligated to recognize felons as citizens at all. I personally would be willing to support a probationary period where you definately cannot vote (5-10 years). Then after that period you can appeal to be able to vote. A sort of good behavior system. It would of course require some sort of board or hearing where the felon's PO, among others should testify on the matter. If you can prove you have been a model citizen/member of the community, you can have your right to vote back.

I don't think a probationary period should be necessary. They've already served their time for their crime; why should they be denied rights further? There are plenty of people who vote that are far from model citizens/members of the community, and if they commit another crime, they'll just be back in prison where they can't vote anyway.

Civil Rights over Oppresion. They should definately be allowed to vote, as they are still citizens of the U.S.A.

I don't think a probationary period should be necessary. They've already served their time for their crime; why should they be denied rights further? There are plenty of people who vote that are far from model citizens/members of the community, and if they commit another crime, they'll just be back in prison where they can't vote anyway.

Because they should show that they can function as a citizen in society before getting the right to vote back. That after you've committed a crime you have 'proven' you shouldn't be a citizen, and after you get out you should prove otherwise. Meh, you're probably right. Maybe I'm just harsh and don't have too much sympathy for some of the humps that give my father grief as a PO. On the other hand, there are those that truly do want and try to 'make it', which is why I allowed for application to regain the right (maybe only a one year wait period...).

Because they should show that they can function as a citizen in society before getting the right to vote back. That after you've committed a crime you have 'proven' you shouldn't be a citizen, and after you get out you should prove otherwise. Meh, you're probably right. Maybe I'm just harsh and don't have too much sympathy for some of the humps that give my father grief as a PO. On the other hand, there are those that truly do want and try to 'make it', which is why I allowed for application to regain the right (maybe only a one year wait period...).

I think the time they spend in prison is them "proving" they should be citizens again. And even those that do not want to try to "make it", let them make that decision. Give them the right to vote again and let them lose it by returning to crime; don't keep it from them on the assumption that they will.

Civil Rights over Oppresion. They should definately be allowed to vote, as they are still citizens of the U.S.A.

Like I said. They're no longer 'guaranteed' any of their rights as citizens after they were convicted under due process of law. Any rights the people of the state have decided to give them is a blessing and something the people are 'willing' to grant to the felons.

I think the time they spend in prison is them "proving" they should be citizens again. And even those that do not want to try to "make it", let them make that decision. Give them the right to vote again and let them lose it by returning to crime; don't keep it from them on the assumption that they will.

So a rapist "proved" he should be a citizen again simply because he lived out his term? It's not keeping it from them on the assumption that they will commit a crime again, but from the knowledge that through the crime they were convicted of they have proven they don't deserve the right to vote (full citizenship). So, logically, in order to achieve the opposite, to regain the right, it should be proven that they should regain that right, and I don't think simply completing a prison sentence does that.

So a rapist "proved" he should be a citizen again simply because he lived out his term? It's not keeping it from them on the assumption that they will commit a crime again, but from the knowledge that through the crime they were convicted of they have proven they don't deserve the right to vote (full citizenship). So, logically, in order to achieve the opposite, to regain the right, it should be proven that they should regain that right, and I don't think simply completing a prison sentence does that.

We, as a society, have set an amount of time that a rapist has to spend imprisoned as punishment for his crime. Now, you can argue that prison sentences are too lenient, but as it stands, that is the accepted amount of time that a person should lose their freedom as punishment for committing a crime. We have established that that is the amount of time a person should lose their rights as a citizen. Why should they have their rights further withheld beyond the amount of time that has already been agreed upon?

I think they should be allowed to vote the whole time, or at least when their sentance has finished. People worry about criminals voting, but what are you worried about? That they might vote for the other rich white guy rather than your rich white guy?

People worry about criminals voting, but what are you worried about? That they might vote for the other rich white guy rather than your rich white guy?

I think the concern is more an ethical one. Once you've violated the law on as high a level as a felony requires, should you have the rights - civil, legal, etc. - that a normal U.S. citizen possesses? Are you even of the right frame of mine to be participating in the electoral process? The U.S. denies the right to vote to children, because children cannot make the kind of decisions [ideally] required in the democratic process. Perhaps the same concern exists in regards to felons?

They should count themselves lucky they don't live in ancient Rome, where conviction of major crimes often meant the loss of the citizenship itself, heavy fines, and exile to distant countries.

I think the concern is more an ethical one. Once you've violated the law on as high a level as a felony requires, should you have the rights - civil, legal, etc. - that a normal U.S. citizen possesses? Are you even of the right frame of mine to be participating in the electoral process? The U.S. denies the right to vote to children, because children cannot make the kind of decisions [ideally] required in the democratic process. Perhaps the same concern exists in regards to felons?

I agree to an extent. One who has been convicted of a felony shouldn't be able to vote, or enjoy any other rights that law abiding citizens have. They must pay their debt to society and if that means in some ways for life, then so be it.

Another question that could be asked here is; Would a person who commits a felony, regardless what it is, vote in the first place? I say NO.

These are not community minded people let alone somebody who would be proud enough of their political system to bother to vote. In the US its hard enough to get across to the general populous the importance of voting let alone to criminals.

Then again if I had my way a person convicted of a felony would not have much in the way of even human rights even after they were released from prison. They didn't consider the rights of their victims, why should we, the so called civilized individuals, consider theirs?

An example would be like in the case of the rapist. Not only would I take away their rights as a citizen, but I would also have their balls cut off and served to them in their next meal. A lobotomy, is to good for these individuals...

Felons should absolutely be allowed to vote. Otherwise, we see one more factor added to the large number already contributing to the propagation of an underclass.

On a related note, did you know that the group most involved in lobbying for California's "Three Strikes" law was the correctional workers union? Little of the old job security. Given that, I have no problem with prisoners voting from prison and forming blocs to try and forward their interests. I mean, beyond watching a couple episodes of "Oz," most of the voting public has no idea about what issues face prisoners.

after you serve the time, you should be returned to society as a full citizen, with full rights.

anything less, and you are really still being punished for something that prison was meant to absolve you of.

if you still need to be punished (ie: still have to lose your rights) then prison didn't really do what it intended, did it?

In the United States of America, some states deny convicted felons the right to vote in local, state and federal elections.

Do you believe this is right? If so, why? If not, why?
No it is not right. They are citizens until they renounce their citizenship.

They should count themselves lucky they don't live in ancient Rome, where conviction of major crimes often meant the loss of the citizenship itself, heavy fines, and exile to distant countries.
Ancient Rome is irrelevant. Democracy to them was landed, male Romans. America is supposed to be about equality before the law. If you're a citizen, you bear the same rights as any other citizen.

Then again if I had my way a person convicted of a felony would not have much in the way of even human rights even after they were released from prison. They didn't consider the rights of their victims, why should we, the so called civilized individuals, consider theirs?

An example would be like in the case of the rapist. Not only would I take away their rights as a citizen, but I would also have their balls cut off and served to them in their next meal. A lobotomy, is to good for these individuals...

Seems kind of harsh in the cases of the more tame felonies, like felony vandalism and criminal mischief.

Everyone should be allowed to vote. We've seen that if the election officials are given any kind of right to deny someone from voting, "color tests" are the result, as in the USA.

Denying voting rights, unlimited detention and death penalty are all very similar - if the government is given any of these powers, they will be misused.

Why do you think that they should be banned from voting as a punishment?

I personally think that, even while in jail, felons should get the right to vote. But I would be willing to change my mind if anyone had a good reason for them not to vote.

In being convicted of a felony they have showen they have no respect or understanding of the law and the authority over them. They have commited injustices against society, and as such should forfiet their right to partake in our soceities functions. Without respect for authority why should we as a society allow them to partake in the election of authority figures over people who DO respect the law and authority

I think, while they are incarcerated, they should be denied the right to vote as further punishment for their crimes, but once they have served their time, they should regain that right.
I agree. Is it true that in America, once you go to jail you can never vote again even if released? I think that is a terrible denial of civil liberty.

after felons have gotten out of prison, they're supposed to be able to contribute to society. so why can't they have a say in government? (if they choose to vote, which a lot of them might not... but they should still have the option.) it's like they're being punished twice for one crime.

I know I don't have any facts to back me up, but it seems to me that if felons were allowed to vote, then that would be a huge voting block that could be pandered to by lowering prison times for various crimes.

*gasp* Let them vote while still in jail?! How dare you!!

Don't you know this is how we got the blacks out of the ballot box once the courts wouldn't let us do it any other way?!

We just threw them all in prison.

I agree. Is it true that in America, once you go to jail you can never vote again even if released? I think that is a terrible denial of civil liberty.

It's not a federal - or national - law. Individual states can and sometimes do create legislation that denies convicted felons the right to vote. Pennsylvania - my state of residence - is an example. However, New York or California or Oklahoma might not.. I'm not which states do and do not allow felons to vote.

*gasp* Let them vote while still in jail?! How dare you!!

Don't you know this is how we got the blacks out of the ballot box once the courts wouldn't let us do it any other way?!

We just threw them all in prison.

It has been suggested that, since in the U.S., blacks and latinos constitute a significantly larger amount of felons than whites, that laws denying felons the right to vote is an attempt by government to disenfranchise said blacks and latinos.

It has been suggested that, since in the U.S., blacks and latinos constitute a significantly larger amount of felons than whites, that laws denying felons the right to vote is an attempt by government to disenfranchise said blacks and latinos.

Well, it's a pretty solid "suggestion." Just take a look at the history of when and how the laws got on the books in the first place. (Hint: check right after the Civil War.)

Where I live a government is elected for not more than 3 years (ie at the end of three years in government they must hold an election, although they can hold one earlier). Anyone sentenced to a period of imprisonment exceeding 3 years may not vote during their imprisonment. Works fine for me.

Those saying 'criminals' should not be allowed to vote are not accounting for the danger this represents. What if your government passed laws that were entirely unfair and then passed laws that criminalised those who protested or attempted to change such laws (US citizens ought to remember that the Constitution can be amended). As unlikely as this is, it ought to be safe guarded against since it is only the safeguards that make it unlikely (anyone who doesnt think people will do bad things to serve their own ends should ask why we even have criminals). After all most people would have thought only 5 years ago that it wasnt possible for the US to go to war for a reason that turned out to be false, and yet...

I think the concern is more an ethical one. Once you've violated the law on as high a level as a felony requires, should you have the rights - civil, legal, etc. - that a normal U.S. citizen possesses? Are you even of the right frame of mine to be participating in the electoral process? The U.S. denies the right to vote to children, because children cannot make the kind of decisions [ideally] required in the democratic process. Perhaps the same concern exists in regards to felons?

In that case your punishment is jail, isn't it? When you let someone out of jail, ideally you want them to live as normaler life as possible to try and avoid them doing what they were accused of again. I still think when they get out at the very least they should get the same rights as everybody else.

after felons have gotten out of prison, they're supposed to be able to contribute to society. so why can't they have a say in government? (if they choose to vote, which a lot of them might not... but they should still have the option.) it's like they're being punished twice for one crime.

People seem to like making it as hard as possible for former prisoners to live a normal life after their release, and then wonder why so many end up commiting more crimes.