Should felons be allowed to vote?

5004 Views 134 Replies 29 Participants Last post by BanditFlyer, Apr 12, 2007

gotrootdude

Discussion Starter · Apr 7, 2004

I believe it is of vital importance that felons be allowed to vote. If a person is subjected to the laws, he/she should have a right to have as much input in the making of the laws as can be afforded.

Our laws do not do enough at this time to afford equal and adaquate defenses in criminal trails. A poor person gets a court appointed attorney, the attorney is appointed by the judge. The defense attorney and prosecutor attorney along with the judge choose the jury. Therefore, if the judge is biased and has reason, the defense attorney, and jury can be slanted toward the prosecutors side. Furthermore, the judge allots the time in which a defense attorney can be allowed to speak, effectively weakening the defense. In the state of Texas, it is common for the judge to allot 30 minutes time for the defense in a death penalty crime. Rights, and the defense of rights, are for those who can afford them.

it was once one of the basic precepts of our system of justice that it is better to free 10 guilty men than to allow one innocent man to rot in jail.
If innocents are inprisoned, what rights to change the system that prosecuted them do they have?

41 - 60 of 135 Posts

bassetman

· #41 · Apr 8, 2004

infidel_kast said:
IN a mixed up, round about, Bizarro-world way, given the fact that if someone has been in prison they can't vote, and we applied our system to the world, Nelson Mandela wouldn't be allowed to vote or run for office. And before anyone says he was a political prisoner, he was still convicted by a SA court.
Hrrmmph.

I don't see anything I said that conflicts with your statement and premise!

Candy! :up:

Infidel_Kastro

· #42 · Apr 8, 2004

bassetman said:
I don't see anything I said that conflicts with your statement and premise!

Candy! :up:

Baasetman, I wasn't disagreeing with you at all, in fact I laughed at it.

angelize56

· #43 · Jun 19, 2004

Florida restores thousands of felons' rights
Friday, June 18, 2004 Posted: 11:48 AM EDT (1548 GMT)

TALLAHASSEE, Florida (AP) -- Thousands of ex-felons will be able to vote, serve on juries and take jobs with state-licensed firms after having their civil rights restored by Gov. Jeb Bush and the Cabinet, sitting as Florida's clemency board.

Bush announced Thursday that state officials completed a review this week of 125,000 cases included in a lawsuit filed against the state on behalf of felons released from prison between 1992 and 2001.

About 22,000 of them were found to be eligible to have their rights automatically restored. Of those, about 11,000 have already regained their privileges.

Of the remaining 103,000, about half probably will be able to get their rights restored if they go through a hearing process, although it's not clear how many will seek to do so.

Many of the remaining 50,000 or so will not be eligible to have their rights restored for a variety of reasons.

"Some are back in prison, some have committed other crimes that make it such that they can't get their rights back," Bush said. Many others may have died or moved out of state.

A Tallahassee judge told the state last year to go back and assist those prisoners who completed sentences over the 10-year period because they had not been helped by the Department of Corrections, which failed to provide them with an application to regain civil rights as they left prison.

"We've gotten through it and it was a good thing to do," Bush said.

Besides the 125,000 cases covered in the lawsuit, Bush also said officials restored civil rights to another 20,861 in the last year and reduced the backlog of cases to just over 8,000.

Florida is one of six states that does not automatically restore civil rights to people who have completed their sentence on a felony conviction.

An attorney for the ACLU, Randy Berg, said the clemency panel's work still represents only a fraction of some 600,000 Floridians who he believes are disenfranchised.

"That figure is not going to go away until the governor and Cabinet make restoration automatic," said Berg, also executive director of the Florida Justice Institute. "(And) that ain't going to happen."

Berg said 30 percent of the all felons leaving prison qualify for having their rights restored. The severity of a crime is a determinant in eligibility for regaining one's rights.

The number of potential former felons denied the opportunity to vote has been part a particularly incendiary political issue in Florida since the 2000 presidential election when Republican George W. Bush, the older brother of the governor, carried Florida's decisive 25 electoral votes by 537 votes of more than 6 million cast.

See less See more

slickoe

· #44 · Jun 19, 2004

Should felons vote? Depends. Simple cocaine possession , even trace amounts, is a felony. So is a rape slaying. We need to prioritize. Do you realize if you sell a cop one doobie in a car your car will be confiscated but if you rape and kill a girl in it you can theorically have it waiting for you in a few decades when you are paroled? Drug crimes are political crimes, and drug criminals are political prisoners. The G has no right telling you or me what to do with our bodies. We can Scubadive, sky dive, (very hazardous), but we can't grow a pot plant in our backyard, if we do we are felons, we can't vote and will likely lose the house. Sheesh. Violent felons should lose voting rights, as well as alot of other rights, and drunk drivers (even first timers) should lose their license FOREVER.

GoneForNow

· #45 · Jun 19, 2004

Should felons vote? Depends. Simple cocaine possession , even trace amounts, is a felony. So is a rape slaying. We need to prioritize. Do you realize if you sell a cop one doobie in a car your car will be confiscated but if you rape and kill a girl in it you can theorically have it waiting for you in a few decades when you are paroled?

Maybe in Wisconsin but not correct in most of the rest of the U.S.

slickoe

· #46 · Jun 19, 2004

Please elaborate. Are forfeiture laws (civil AND criminal) now applied to all felonies or just drug felonies?

Infidel_Kastro

· #47 · Jun 19, 2004

slickoe said:
Should felons vote? Depends. Simple cocaine possession , even trace amounts, is a felony. So is a rape slaying. We need to prioritize. Do you realize if you sell a cop one doobie in a car your car will be confiscated but if you rape and kill a girl in it you can theorically have it waiting for you in a few decades when you are paroled? Drug crimes are political crimes, and drug criminals are political prisoners. The G has no right telling you or me what to do with our bodies. We can Scubadive, sky dive, (very hazardous), but we can't grow a pot plant in our backyard, if we do we are felons, we can't vote and will likely lose the house. Sheesh. Violent felons should lose voting rights, as well as alot of other rights, and drunk drivers (even first timers) should lose their license FOREVER.

Drig crimes are politcal crimes yada yada yada.
If you don't like it, change the laws. That is if you can remoev the bong long enough from your mouth and have a coherent thought.
What a load of...
Scuabdive, skydive doesn't affect ANYONE but you. However, drugs do permeate a society and cause more harm for SOCIETY than the individual with increased crime rates, loss of productivity, and a drain on services.
but tell me, you still problably think that it is safer to drive while stoned than while drunk.

As far as votes, lets think about this, and while use the fact that there is amazing statistics on African Americans in prison or with felony convictions, I believe a third, or some obnoxious number like that. Well if they can't vote, and there really is no reason not to except for some lame attempt to continue to label or punish someone, you have eroded the voting abilites of a large minority.
For absolutely no reson.

GoneForNow

· #48 · Jun 19, 2004

Most drug felony laws don't have a forfeiture component. Another example of media hype distorting reality. Most forfeiture statutes are federal which, when compared to state prosecution of drug felonies, amount to an extremely small percentage. The feds are looking for KingPins not some schmuck with a joint in his pocket (feel safer now Wino?). Forfeiture statutes are equitable in nature to avoid a demand for a jury trial. Because they are equitable in nature they are civil not criminal.

Infidel_Kastro

· #49 · Jun 19, 2004

gbrumb said:
Most drug felony laws don't have a forfeiture component. Another example of media hype distorting reality. Most forfeiture statutes are federal which, when compared to state prosecution of drug felonies, amount to an extremely small percentage. The feds are looking for KingPins not some schmuck with a joint in his pocket (feel safer now Wino?). Forfeiture statutes are equitable in nature to avoid a demand for a jury trial. Because they are equitable in nature they are civil not criminal.

p.s. Did you read my reply to you on the pledge thread?

slickoe

· #50 · Jun 19, 2004

infidel_kast said:
Drig crimes are politcal crimes yada yada yada.
If you don't like it, change the laws. That is if you can remoev the bong long enough from your mouth and have a coherent thought.
What a load of...
Scuabdive, skydive doesn't affect ANYONE but you. However, drugs do permeate a society and cause more harm for SOCIETY than the individual with increased crime rates, loss of productivity, and a drain on services.
but tell me, you still problably think that it is safer to drive while stoned than while drunk.

You better watch it there, pard. I know you're a Texan but that's no excuse. I haven't hit a bong in over 10 years (or had a drink in 7) and show me one incoherent thought I have EVER posted here. If you're done with personal insults, people who break their necks skydiving or riding a crotch rocket without a helmet ARE a drain on society, have you ever been to a convalescent home? Increased crime rates? Because they are illegal in the first place, duh. Drain on services? Alcohol is the most socially devastaing drug in America. Responsible for more murders, violence, domestic abuse, etc. And BTW everyone (except you) knows it IS safer to drive stoned then drunk. You drive slower but you aren't all over the damn road. And you dodged my question. Why are small time drug criminals geting their property confiscated while killers and rapists aren't?

GoneForNow

· #51 · Jun 19, 2004

slickoe said:
and show me one incoherent thought I have EVER posted here.

Now that will be subject to a number of different responses.

Infidel_Kastro

· #52 · Jun 19, 2004

slickoe said:
You better watch it there, pard. I know you're a Texan but that's no excuse. I haven't hit a bong in over 10 years (or had a drink in 7) and show me one incoherent thought I have EVER posted here. If you're done with personal insults, people who break their necks skydiving or riding a crotch rocket without a helmet ARE a drain on society, have you ever been to a convalescent home? Increased crime rates? Because they are illegal in the first place, duh. Drain on services? Alcohol is the most socially devastaing drug in America. Responsible for more murders, violence, domestic abuse, etc. And BTW everyone (except you) knows it IS safer to drive stoned then drunk. You drive slower but you aren't all over the damn road. And you dodged my question. Why are small time drug criminals geting their property confiscated while killers and rapists aren't?

Maybe you should hit it...

(JK)

And NEITHER is safer.

Last time I checked, to answer your question about forfeitures, there was very little monetary gain in raping and killing.

But it is interesting that you bring up helmet laws, isn't that the reason why we have them, so people don't become a drain on society, but then again, i guess if someone strokes out and becomes a zucchini from smoking heroin or crack, he was only hurting himself.
Lets say drugs were legal, it isn't going to change anything. You would still be addicted and probably couldn't hold down a job, so you wouldn't have any money, so what are you going to pay with to feed your addiction?

slickoe

· #53 · Jun 19, 2004

You are good at arguing points when you aren't engaging in cheech and chong level insults. Whether people would be a further "drain" to society if drug laws were relaxed is debatable. Would everyone rush out and become an addict if they were legalized? I have lived all over the country (including San Antone and Grand Prairie) and you can get dope if u want it. There is no reason to make a felony of it. Dope is here to stay. How long have we been fighting the war on drugs? Pot keeps getting stronger and coke and smack are stronger and cheaper than ever. Making felons out of (mostly minority) users satisfies the political agenda of powerful forces in this country.

slickoe

· #54 · Jun 19, 2004

gbrumb said:
Now that will be subject to a number of different responses.

I just looked up incoherent in the dictionary (alto I already knew what it meant). Search my posts and tell me where exactly I have been incoherent (and if I have it was due to LEGAL drugs I get from the VA, I'll have you know).

bassetman

· #55 · Jun 19, 2004

Well, GB, if they are allowed to HOLD office, why shoulnd't they be allowed to vote?

GoneForNow

· #56 · Jun 19, 2004

bassetman said:
Well, GB, if they are allowed to HOLD office, why shoulnd't they be allowed to vote?

I thought that's what we are discussing.

I don't think I've taken a position either way. But given what I've read on this site a rapist couldn't vote any worse!

Wino

· #57 · Jun 19, 2004

gbrumb said:
..... The feds are looking for KingPins not some schmuck with a joint in his pocket (feel safer now Wino?).

Safer? Kinda sorta!

You might try passing that distinction on to law enforcement agencies - they seem to bust more of us schmucks than kingpins. I do believe nationwide we have more petty schmucks in jail for minor possession than the other.

The "War on Drugs" is and has been a joke - total waste of revenues (approaching $30 B a year) which could be better spent on securing our borders from terrorist (more successfully than drug interdiction, hopefully) - or better yet, another tax rebate - but that would reduce the bureaucracy and increase unemployment and we can't have that in an election year. Eventually, illegal drugs will be made legal, taxed and controlled by the US - just as they currently do with cigarettes (more addictive than drugs) and alcohol (also more addictive).

BTW, for those who believe drug users are a drag on society, you need to get a grip on reality. There are more productive users than non-productive (excluding alcohol) and the majority do so without stealing, murdering, etc. to support their "habit". Over the years I have lost more friends from legal drugs than illegal, due to lung cancer, heart disease, obesity, liver disease.

I truly believe had Jimmy Carter been re-elected, weed would be legal to day (although I would hate to have seen him in another term). Then along came Reagan with 'just say no' and it's been down hill since. We have elected a president who said, "he did, but did not inhale", another that is an ex-cocaine user, and our next president who surely smoked pot in Vietnam and during the anti-war protest of the '70's. This is not to mention the number of alcoholics we have elected president throughout our history nor the massive drugs user JFK. Our drug laws are antiquated, nonsensical and hypocritical to say the least and need to be changed. Our neighbors to the north appear to be more progressive in this matter than the US.

See less See more

lizard

· #58 · Jun 19, 2004

NO. A simple analogy...
I was a member of a club a while ago.

It had rules.

I didn't like the rules.

I told them to go F*** themselves.

They kicked me out.

Now they won't let me vote.

slickoe

· #59 · Jun 19, 2004

I like Robert A. Henleins idea- only "citizens" can vote; and citizenship can only be gained thru a stint in the military or national service. Seems if you aren't willing to serve your country (REALLY SERVE) you should not have the right to have a say in how it is run like some kind of lazy leech.

Izme

· #60 · Jun 19, 2004

gbrumb said:
The feds are looking for KingPins not some schmuck with a joint in his pocket (feel safer now Wino?).

:up:
Ouchhhhhhhhhh

See less See more

41 - 60 of 135 Posts