|
See... I don't like where these assumptions are going, from both sides of the argument.
Obviously, the onus to not recidivate is squarely on the offender. Just because you have a criminal record doesn't mean you're GOING to get another record, just that you're statistically more likely to reoffend if you've spent time in an institution.
There are legitimate jobs that a person with a criminal record can obtain. Or perhaps I'm operating from another faulty assumption of my own, as I do not know what proportion of jobs require a criminal record check in the USA. Generally in Canada it's only when you're placed in a position of authority, you will have access to confidential client information, or where you have contact with children or disadvantaged populations.
But I feel as if I'm going off on a tangent... I agree with Ustwo that not being able to vote doesn't make you commit crime. But ignoring all the associated elements of the equation doesn't make any sense either. Crime is such a multifaceted problem, it requires a multifaceted solution.
Quite frankly, I still don't see what is to be gained by removing the right to vote from these people. Is it strictly punishment? A deterrent? It seems overly harsh in the former, and completely ineffective in the latter.
__________________
Feh.
|