Quote:
|
Originally Posted by KMA-628
I am not referring to the people that were on the list, but shouldn't have been. I am referring to the comments in the article about the people that are rightfully on the list.
I would hazard a guess (based on opinion, nothing else) that a large number of the people that are rightfully on the list don't care whether they vote or not. I may be wrong, but it is just a suspicion.
Sometimes there is an advocacy group that uses "victims" to promote their own cause when the supposed victims don't have the same agenda, they are just being used. Off the top of my head, I don't have any examples.
I am not really describing this as well as I would like to, am I making sense?
|
The first problem I see with what you wrote is that there is no reasonable, inexpensive, or quick way to determine who should be on the banned list or who has been placed on it inaccurately.
That is one reason someone could argue that the list should be scrapped--until proponents of such a list or law can prove they will not place an innocent person on it. That's how our laws have always worked, and they should not work any differently in this case.
Now, the rest of your post implied that felons should a)know the ramifications of their behavior, and b) the status quo of restricting their voting priviledge is normal/acceptable.
Voting priviledge restrictions is not normal, nor is it even widespread:
Voting rights are left up to the states.
All except Vermont and Maine prohibit felony
prisoners from voting.
Only six states permanently ban all ex-offenders, even those who've completed their sentences.
Why are you sitting here arguing that it is normal when only a handful of states support the practice? Do you even live in a state that bars ex-cons from voting?
Clearly, an ex-con who moves from California (where they can vote) to Texas (where they can't) is not being any more irresponsible or unaware of his or her priviledges simply due to changing residency.
While I agree with you that most felons on that list probably don't give a shit about voting, we ought to be careful to champion that attitude. While they can't vote, those laws certainly apply to them.
Or would you rather inculcate an attitude that further seperates felons from the communities they live in? I would rather they feel welcomed back into the community, if we are concerned about their continued productivity and the community's continued safety.
If you don't want them to feel welcome, or beholden to the social ties in the community, keep treating them like second class citizens. You are correct, though--they probably don't care what you do one way or the other since most suspect you don't care as it is (and you seem to indicate you don't). So you have only yourself to blame when a person who does not get all the benefits of citizenship decides not to act within the same constraints as a citizen ought to--remember that ditty about responsibility.