Should ex-felon's have the right to vote?

[Spiffums]

If voting worked they wouldn't let us do it. I do agree that you've paid your debt to society and severed your time in full that ALL your rights should be restored.

[Kellhound]

ok lets run with this, your in a state with strict laws about weed, say Gerogia where a felony is anything >1oz, one of your friends needs a ride so you say sure not knowing they have 2oz. of weed in their pocket. now lets say for this scenario you get poped for speeding 20 over, no big deal normally you would be asked to step out be patted down car searched, go to booking post bail and wait for your court date. well your friend was packing weed, and had enough for flag for felony so he tries to hide it under the seat. CONGRATULATIONS your now a felon because the weed was in your car, you go to jail, lose the right to vote while there, and have little to no chance of getting the felony drop because its your car so your automatically at fault.

So how are you liking that 'punishment' now?

Dont be stupid and have friends that are druggies. If you make poor enough choices to have druggie friends, it is a good bet you make poor choices in other things as well.

[Deleted]

"No taxation without representation" - it's the principle the Republic was founded on. Unless ex-felons citizens somehow are made free from taxation, they should have the right to vote. Period.

[krunksmash]

Patted down and arrested for going 20 over? Is that legitimate?

yes it is, welcome to Georgia.

- - - Updated - - -

Dont be stupid and have friends that are druggies. If you make poor enough choices to have druggie friends, it is a good bet you make poor choices in other things as well.

why does the friend have to be a druggie? maybe they were just starting to experiment and you didn't know. don't dodge, answer the question based on the scenario.

[Tyrianth]

yes it is, welcome to Georgia.

- - - Updated - - -



why does the friend have to be a druggie? maybe they were just starting to experiment and you didn't know. don't dodge, answer the question based on the scenario.

The more I learn about American laws the more I wonder how they can claim to be the land of the free...

[Stop Pretending]

Yes, 3 strike laws mean you can get life in prison for drug possession. That includes weed.

So you're saying there were two previous felonies. Ok, so it's not how it works. Nice try though.

[RampageBW1]

I am in favor that felons can get their voting rights returned when they have paid their debt to society in full.

[lockedout]

I am in favor that felons can get their voting rights returned when they have paid their debt to society in full.

Their right to bare arms as well?

[Stop Pretending]

Interesting story "large quantities" varies from state to state. From less than an ounce to 60 pounds.

Weed is a controlled substance federally, but the federal government allows the states to decide what amount is considered a felony.

Talk about shifting goal posts. The argument was over a joint. Just stop.

[krunksmash]

The more I learn about American laws the more I wonder how they can claim to be the land of the free...

I ask my self the same thing.

[Kellhound]

yes it is, welcome to Georgia.

- - - Updated - - -



why does the friend have to be a druggie? maybe they were just starting to experiment and you didn't know. don't dodge, answer the question based on the scenario.

Just starting to experiment and has 2oz and knows its a felony.... Seems you still have poor choices in friends. I wouldnt associate with that type even though its legal here.
The law is the law. If you feel some laws are not fair, work to change them.

[Tyrianth]

Just starting to experiment and has 2oz and knows its a felony.... Seems you still have poor choices in friends. I wouldnt associate with that type even though its legal here.
The law is the law. If you feel some laws are not fair, work to change them.

How is supposed to work to change them when we can't even vote now?

- - - Updated - - -

Their right to bare arms as well?

Why not? They served their time. If you want them to rehabilitate and not re-offend then a good step towards that is having the government treat them the same as any other citizen. Which means reinstatement of rights. If their crime was so severe that you can't reinstate their full rights, then why even let them out of prison. You obviously feel they still pose a risk to society.

[Kellhound]

How is supposed to work to change them when we can't even vote now?

- - - Updated - - -



Why not? They served their time. If you want them to rehabilitate and not re-offend then a good step towards that is having the government treat them the same as any other citizen. Which means reinstatement of rights. If their crime was so severe that you can't reinstate their full rights, then why even let them out of prison. You obviously feel they still pose a risk to society.

Martyrs are needed to make a case to the public.

[Tyrianth]

Martyrs are needed to make a case to the public.

Civilized countries shouldn't need martyrs for change to happen. Martyrs are for groups like ISIS.

[Bapestar]

Their right to bare arms as well?

Why not? If they have paid their debt to society, and gone through the necessary procedures.

[Kellhound]

Civilized countries shouldn't need martyrs for change to happen. Martyrs are for groups like ISIS.

Laws change by influencing emotions, not by appealing to logic. That is true the world over.

[Draco-Onis]

Ex-felons should have all their rights restored once they are out of prison, the point of prison is for people to pay for their crimes if people feel that prison is not doing an adequate job than then the punishment should be changed not people's rights after they paid it.

[Fang7986]

ok lets run with this, your in a state with strict laws about weed, say Gerogia where a felony is anything >1oz, one of your friends needs a ride so you say sure not knowing they have 2oz. of weed in their pocket. now lets say for this scenario you get poped for speeding 20 over, no big deal normally you would be asked to step out be patted down car searched, go to booking post bail and wait for your court date. well your friend was packing weed, and had enough for flag for felony so he tries to hide it under the seat. CONGRATULATIONS your now a felon because the weed was in your car, you go to jail, lose the right to vote while there, and have little to no chance of getting the felony drop because its your car so your automatically at fault.

So how are you liking that 'punishment' now?

well i'd have killed my friend the instant i found out he had brought weed into my car so i'd accept it. if im stupid enough to hang out with an idiot pothead i don't deserve the right to vote

[Vynny]

I say they should. They have paid their price to society, no matter how much they have changed, their voices will never be heard in the public arena. Depriving ex-felons of the right to vote alienates certain minorities, who have the deck stacked against them to begin with in the justice system.

Depriving ex-felons of the right to vote gives an unfair advantage to the Republican party. This is because the poor and African Americans tend to vote Democratic.

Disenfranchisement of ex-felons amounts to extra punishment, other Democratic countries do not do this.

Thoughts?

It's highly debatable whether a certain amount of punishment is too much for a certain type of crime, and I do think depriving someone of their right to vote after serving their sentence is a bit overboard, but at the same time, the people advocating against it seem to be doing it for all the wrong reasons. I mean look at your own post, a justification you give is that certain minorities shouldn't be held responsible to the same degree as a white person because for some reason they couldn't help it? No, that's retarded, you always have a choice, and they made the wrong one, so they should be punished, but the question is whether the punishment fits the crime. I also have to point out your blatant partisanship which is another issue I take with what you're saying because it shows that you're not just advocating this for the sake of those afflicted, but also because you want to stick it to republicans which although I'm not a republican, I have no love for this partisan based advocacy rather than advocacy for the benefit of those who are in need of the help.

Lastly, I'd like to point out that only 28% of black people in America live in poverty. Now, that's still disproportionately high and it needs to go down further than it has (which it has been continually since the 1970's), but besides that, it means that 72% of black people in America do not live in poverty, and so how can you justify claiming that "certain minorities" have the deck stacked against them when the majority of black people do not live under circumstances that would possibly constitute the claim that they had no other option than crime?

- - - Updated - - -

ok lets run with this, your in a state with strict laws about weed, say Gerogia where a felony is anything >1oz, one of your friends needs a ride so you say sure not knowing they have 2oz. of weed in their pocket. now lets say for this scenario you get poped for speeding 20 over, no big deal normally you would be asked to step out be patted down car searched, go to booking post bail and wait for your court date. well your friend was packing weed, and had enough for flag for felony so he tries to hide it under the seat. CONGRATULATIONS your now a felon because the weed was in your car, you go to jail, lose the right to vote while there, and have little to no chance of getting the felony drop because its your car so your automatically at fault.

So how are you liking that 'punishment' now?

WTF? "20 over, no big deal"? WTF?

I mean seriously, WTF? Who the hell taught you that 20 over is no big deal? I mean WTF? If I ever got a ticket for going 20 over when I was first starting to drive my parents would've taken away my license. And this isn't some responsible driving thing or anything like that, it was because we were fucking poor and couldn't afford tickets like that. I mean seriously WTF, is this actually something considered to be no big deal or what because that's way fucking over the speed limit.

[Machismo]

I don't pander to criminals and I really have never heard a good reason to forgive them.

Like I said in the first post they chose to be a blight on society and so there's no damn good reason to reward them for that choice.

- - - Updated - - -



Disenfranchise is the wrong word to use. See post #43 for explanation as to why.

Just because you don't give a damn about them, is no justification to take away their freedom. By doing so, you give up cause to complain when someone chooses to do the same to you.

- - - Updated - - -

What the dilly is then

I enjoy pointing out the foolishness of conservatives who argue against freedom.