Jack Kemp Urges Congress to Restore the Right to Vote to Felons Who Have Served Their Time
Jack Kemp, the former Republican vice presidential candidate and HUD secretary, urged Congress on Tuesday to require states to restore voting rights for felons once they complete their sentences.
2005-10-20
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
I support this. Would it apply also to those convicted of "hate crimes", sexual assault, and other politicized crimes?
Convicted repeat-offender child-molesters, are they political criminals? I think not and I think they should be exempted from this. I am not necessarily against this idea, but I absolutely think certain types of crime and criminals should be exempted, e.g. child/sexual molesters.
As far as I'm concerned if you commit and are convicted of those types heinous crimes against society, then you forfeit your right to participate in the voting process.
Why should a convicted child/sexual molester be exempted from voting? The two have nothing to do with each other.
Just imagine... If prisoners had the right to vote while in prison...
Would that encourage them to learn more about the political process? Would that increase their desire for education in general?
"Why should a convicted child/sexual molester be exempted from voting?"
I can't believe you would even ask that question. Child sexual molesters are the lowest form of vermine in our society. They're proven to be in-curable. They do not deserve to function in and enjoy the benefits of a free society such as the right to vote.
I'm unsure how I feel about prisoners voting. For one thing, of course I understand that there's too many people in prison, owing to the retarded anti-drug laws. And there are certainly innocent people in prison. I think it is important to remember at all times in dealing with prisoners that although the population is much, much higher in its contents of people who behave badly, there are some people there who should not be, either owing to an unjust law, or to a miscarriage of justice. Restricting our discussion -- as we must -- to the hypothetical case of a prison comprising actual murderers and theifs serving their time... probably not. I will try to bring my friend into this discussion who just got out of prison (convicted of armed robbery about a year after we got out of high school).
Just because someone is the lowest kind of vermin doesn't mean they can't make an honest assessment about politics, Slinger.
Look at you and Philpott: to my knowledge neither of you have been to prison for any length of time (Paul's several youthful indiscretions aside). Yet you guys both made the mistake of voting for Bush. Who is to say a child molester couldn't have made a better decision than that?
Vermin or not, what does criminal behavior have to do with voting?
Your conservative Christian friend, BTK, was a model citizen who just happened to be a serial killer. He probably voted for Bush as well. Do you want to go back and remove his vote from the rolls because he was later convicted?
What about someone like Michael Milken? Or Oliver North? Should they have the right to vote?
And what about someone like Ken Lay who didn't kill anyone (that we know about) but ruined the lives of thousands of people? Should he keep the right to vote? Isn't his crime worse than the crime of someone who was in possesion of 5 grams of crack?
By the way, that person with the 5 grams of crack (about the same amount as 5 packs of Sweet n' Low) would receive the same mandatory 5-year sentence as someone who was convicted of trafficking 500 grams of cocaine (about the same amount as a 1 pound bag of sugar).
Who is the worse criminal? What does either have to do with the ability to make a decision about voting?
And once a criminal has "paid his debt to society" by serving that time in jail, why shouldn't they have their full rights restored?
Isn't that what "paying" your debt is about?
Post a Comment