Ace_O_Spades

Isn't that convenient... Avoid commenting on any of the counterpoints I make to your position.

Attempting to have debate with you is like running headlong into a brick wall over and over. I don't know why I bother.

__________________
Feh.

Ustwo

I'm glad you found it ridiculous, I don't think it is, I might be worried if you found it logical.

My logic is they have forfeited their right to participate in electing people to office by their obvious 'bad' choices.

Seen in this light, disenfranchisement seems a particularly appropriate punishment for felons. The murderer, rapist, or thief has expressed contempt for his fellow citizens and broken the rules of society in the most unmistakable way. It’s fitting that society should deprive him of his role in determining the content of those rules or electing the magistrate who enforces them.

I have no problem with this.

I know thats MILLIONS of disenfranchised democrats out there, but really you will have to forgive me for not caring

'Convicted Felons for Obama' has a nice ring to it of course.


Precedent? This isn't something new, their is no 'slippery slope' here. This is democrats trying to get more of their supporters voting. If in some bizzaro world convicted felons voted republican I don't think anyone supporting this wold be talking about 'basic' rights.

Now me, I can't imagine such a world as its obvious that felons really feel kinship with the democrats, but if they for some reason started to vote republican I'd like to think I'd stick with my principles.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

roachboy

figures that the lynchpin of the non-argument you have is your assumption that what is at issue--removing the right to vote from ex-felons--would affect the democrats (the Them) and not the far right (the Us)...that way you dont need any logic.

additionally, locking these people out of the political process is a guarantee that recidivism will if anything rise--because you treat conviction of a felony like original sin without the jesus part in the fable-world of xtianity--no possibility of redemption, no possibility of becoming a citizen--and there is no more basic right than citizenship, than voting---so were anyone not already on the lunatic fringe of the right to take your position seriously, its result would be an expansion of a category of non-citizen, the creation of a new and improved space of powerlessness. way to go. good thing you're nowhere near having any power.


that's why i'm done with this nonsense---but if your remaining credibility is of any concern, why not take on the points ace-o-spades has made against you.

if you can't manage a logical response, maybe you'll fare better defending your specious data.

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

Ustwo

Dude you haven't said anything worthy of debate.

I don't agree with you, I don't think that giving felons the right to vote does ANYTHING to help with recidivism, you have no proof of it helping.

You are being all flowery and such, but in reality I don't see a difference.

What exactly do you want me to debate?

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

Glory's Sun

don't all crimes, misdemeanor or felony infringe upon a person's right in some way shape or form??

If you want to take away the right to vote, then don't tax them.. if you want your money then let them vote.

Willravel

"We can take away your right to vote if we feel like it."
I don't remember saying it was new, it's just a foot that's been in the door for quite some time that a bad leader could use to his or her advantage to say that more people can't vote.

Your ascertain that they're all Democrat is clearly just a veiled insult at Democrats and is thus ignored.

Ustwo

You mean I could opt out of voting and opt out of taxes?



You know I think I know how to get that socialist government so many people on TFP want.

Of course when all the conservatives opt out of voting, who's going to pay for the programs?

Anyways outside of a slogan in the 1700's voting and taxation are not linked.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

Glory's Sun

well fuck, if I'm a felon and can't do shit anyway.. what the fuck do I care about what programs are out there?? They aren't doing me any good.

Rekna

That article is stupid. It compares a drunk driver losing their license to a felon losing their vote. Here is a question for you, how did the felon use his vote to commit the crime? Is there any way that a felon being able to vote aided them or will aide them in past and future criminal activity?

The only reason states don't allow it is to disenfranchise the vote.

Willravel

Good point Rekna, and to add on there's nothing in the Constitution or Bill of Rights about drivers licenses.

This is a prime example. guccilvr is a smart guy who is more than capable of making a good decision when it comes to voting, and who is effected by votes. He's not getting representation, and that's not fair.

BTW, guccilvr, would you characterize your political philosophy as liberal or conservative? Just curious.

FTFY

Cynthetiq

You're right, the comparison isn't equitable.

Drunk driving isn't a felony, but only a misdemeanor. Drunk driving killing someone isn't a felony either. It's also a misdemeanor.

Murder is a felony.

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.

Willravel

More than 30 grams of MJ is a felony, too. That's about a fistful.

dksuddeth

There is nothing about abortion in the constitution or bill of rights either, but it is a right. So the lesson should be, just because it isn't specifically listed does not mean the right does not exist.

__________________
"no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything. You cannot conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him."

Rekna

Having crack cocaine is a felony also but having powdered cocaine is not.

People convicted of using crack cocaine are predominantly black, people convicted of using powdered cocaine are predominantly white.

dksuddeth

This is not always correct. For instance, in TX, driving without a license is a class C misdemeanor punishable only by a fine. In Illinois, driving without a drivers license is a Class C felony upon your second conviction. Don't even have to be drunk.

__________________
"no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything. You cannot conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him."

Willravel

All I said was it's not in the Constitution or BOR. Am I wrong? Stop adding more to my posts in your head. I said nothing about the drivers license being a right in this thread.

Glory's Sun

I don't associate with any party.. but I'm on the liberal side of things.

savmesom11

I too can claim perfection then as I haven't committed a felony either. However; high recidivism rates can be directly attributed to loss of rights, voting may not be the strongest of them but a loss none the less.

And to clarify the question was not why do you think the government continues to withhold rights from convicted felons but what 'we' as citizens believe is right. I could give a laundry list of why I think things are the way they are but that is for another post.

__________________
* I do not believe that struggles are a sign of life falling apart, but rather a step of life falling into place. *

dksuddeth

did you not imply that by <insert random subjet here> not being in the constitution or bill of rights, that means that <again, random subject> isn't a right?

If that's not why you brought it up then I don't understand why it was even compared to voting.

__________________
"no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything. You cannot conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him."

savmesom11

As a social worker I take that as a direct attack, but I would just like to say this world is lucky to have people like me.....we protect others from people like you.

Xazy - Thank you so much, I don't have to agree with you to respect your opinion.

__________________
* I do not believe that struggles are a sign of life falling apart, but rather a step of life falling into place. *

Ace_O_Spades

I see what you did there... "I make a point, and even if you provide evidence that suggests my point is possibly based on some faulty assumptions, I can say 'there's nothing to debate here, move along' and hope you go away"

There is debate here... the debate is not whether voting would decrease recidivism. The debate is whether in a country that claims to be the land of the free can prevent a large proportion of its lower socioeconomic class from participating in deciding their government. It is a fundamental human rights issue in a constitutional democracy.

It is not about the fact that felons disproportionately vote democrat, that is just a red herring... But one you seem to enjoy using to trump any attempt at discussion.

How is the air up there on your high horse?

__________________
Feh.

savmesom11

Not to mention the 18 year old that commits some stupid crime that results in a felony, learns from it and goes on to lead a productive life, then at 40 is still be punished for poor judgment as a teen-ager. Direct correlation to recidivism rates.

__________________
* I do not believe that struggles are a sign of life falling apart, but rather a step of life falling into place. *

Willravel

There was no implication. I was more going for the "original principles" kinda thing, speaking to the founding fathers. I was saying this is something that's always been in the US.
I didn't bring it up, I was responding.

Rekna

I have yet seeing someone who doesn't want felons vote put up an argument of why they shouldn't be able to vote other than arguments that boil down to "thats the way it is". Please tell me a logical reason why a felon should not be able to vote that doesn't involve this argument.

Willravel

So far, it seems as if it's about "trusting them", which unfortunately doesn't seem to take into account that we let idiots vote all the time. When we start asking for qualifications in order to vote, it makes voting more difficult and excludes people who need representation (by default, ALL people need governmental representation, lest they be subjugated).

Ace_O_Spades

Or that, "B-b-but... they vote democrat!"

__________________
Feh.

Cynthetiq

While it may be a stupid 18 year old, there's something about having a permanent record and having to be responsible for that record. We are all too forgiving to those that "made" a mistake. Life is making mistakes and taking responsibilty for them.

You want to be responsible for them, please go right ahead. I'm not interested in taking care of someone who had disregard for societal rule and obligations. Why do I have to be burdened with it time and time again for someone else's mistakes? I have a hard enough time juggling my own.

Shit still stinks no matter how deep you bury it or try to flower it up.

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.

Ace_O_Spades

I would argue that taking responsibility for the mistake is satisfied by doing the punishment imposed by the court, and should not extend past this. One should not lose one of their fundamental freedoms for life for something that in some states is quite arbitrary.

__________________
Feh.

Cynthetiq

Arbitrary? Seems to not be so arbitrary. That's the wonderful part about the 50 states. You have 50 different places to try out which laws you'd like to live under. You can always move to another state. These people still have some choices.

I'd agree with you if it was the federal government disenfrancising the felons, but it isn't.

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.

Ace_O_Spades

Ah! See, that is my mistake. I assumed the federal government banned them from voting nationwide once they received a felony charge. In Canada we have one criminal code for the entire country. Well besides Quebec, that is run on the civil law system, but that's neither here nor there.

__________________
Feh.

Cynthetiq

You know what, that may be my bad as well in oversimplifying this, if you commit a federal crime as a felony I believe you are then disenfrancised from the federal governement.

RICHARDSON v. RAMIREZ which was found by the USSC to not be in violation of the 14th Amendment.

read it, it is about some felonius (is that a word? it sounds cool) individuals who said that California had no right to disenfranchise them. The USSC 1974 stated California was within the US Constitution 14th Amendment.

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.

Ace_O_Spades

Wow, I'm not even going to touch THAT one...

__________________
Feh.

roachboy

so wait cyn--you reject the idea that the entire criminal legal system is based around, which is that there is some correspondence between being convicted of a felony and a period of incarceration--which should zero things out.

you seem instead to imagine that the commission of a felony reflects some inward defect--you kind of have to assume something like this for your argument to make sense (you dont say this---i'm filling in the middle step)...so if commission of a felony is an expression of a Defect of or a Predisposition to Evil, then it would kind of follow that you'd be fine with stripping ex-felons of their most basic civil rights--but that really does fly entirely in the face of the whole american criminal legal system.


what does the right to vote have to do with whether you, personally, would trust someone to---o i dont know---be your accountant--if you knew that he had a prior conviction for--say--felony tax evasion?

i dont see any connection.

we're talking about the right of people who have been convicted of a felony and have served the time that society (except you) understands to be adequate punishment for that felony should have the right to vote AFTER they've served their sentence.

there are no good conclusions to be drawn from your position either--nor from that of ustwo--permanent disenfranchisement of ex-felons would create a permanent class of non-citizens, without rights, without representation--it is not rocket science to see that these folk would understand themselves are being ENTIRELY without recourse in the context of the existing order--because they would be---and as a function of that would be FAR more likely to not only be inclined to but to be situationally FORCED to commit other crimes. so it seems that your position, were it translated into policy, would be entirely self-fulfilling.

maybe from there it'd be easy to justify rounding these folks up and sending them to lovely re-education camps--where they still would have no hope of getting back their basic civil liberties--so why not just advocate capital punishment for all felonies?

functionally you're already doing it.

i really dont understand where this is coming from.

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

Cynthetiq

I personally feel that there is some sort of permanent punishment. Death? Too extreme. Concentration Camps? Too Extreme.

But to remove some fundatmental liberties that differentiate those that didn't commit ANY crime. Be restored whole each and every time you've "Time served"? Personally, I find it reprehensible and a non deterrent for career criminals.

The most important civil liberties, BOR don't get infringed up with the exception right to bear arms, but the rest, there's no harm to them. I find it for the greater good. They are representated, just like legal aliens are represented by their familial and others who have the right to vote.

Personally I'd rather cane or cut off their fingers but that's not possible since it is too "barbaric".

Again, they are free to move to another state that does allow them the right to vote. There's nothing stopping them after they are off parole.

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.

Ustwo

Woah there nelly, now how did we get from disenfranchisement to non-citizens without rights? Thats a major leap of logic there. They can't vote but that doesn't mean they have no rights, they have simply lost THE right, singular, to participate in the election process.

You can't vote so therefore committing more crimes is the logical conclusion...seriously you believe this? Who would have thought that recidivism was due to lack of a ballot. If only they voted BEFORE committing their crimes then perhaps it could have been avoided all together.

Yes losing the right to vote is like dying, please....

A fine melodrama.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

Tully Mars

Almost every state has a point to where DUII becomes a felony. Usually that's based on the number of times you've been convicted. Some other's do it based on the BAC at the time of your arrest and the number of past offensives. But in contrast in New Jersey drunk driving is not a crime.

http://www.ncsl.org/programs/lis/dui/felony.htm

__________________
I used to drink to drown my sorrows, but the damned things have learned how to swim- Frida Kahlo

Vice President Starkizzer Fan Club

Willravel

So because you don't value the right to vote no one gets to? You're not a libertarian, you're a fascist. And I say that using the political term without intending to draw comparisons to other fascists or having everyone drum up preconceptions. I honestly think that you believe in a singular power in government.

Ace_O_Spades

Tell that to Kenyans

__________________
Feh.

dksuddeth

I'd love to read that decision, do you have a link?

__________________
"no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything. You cannot conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him."

Glory's Sun

Ok, I'll go for the loss of certain rights to vote for career criminals. You fuck up 2 or 3 times ..ok.. you should be differentiated from those who live a "clean" life. However, if you fuck up once, do what you were told to do, and prove that you can be a responsible citizen (no fuckups while on parole, probation etc) then you should be allowed to vote.

What motivation does a convicted felon have to move? Ok I can now vote in the new state, but I still can't find a job so now I'll end up having a record in two states instead of one.......