Should inmates and ex-cons be allowed/denied to vote in elections?

[erislover]

@Airman Doors

Human rights? What about the rights of the people that these violent felons killed, crippled, or severely injured?

Oh, I think they should keep their right to vote, too. I thought that was clear.

[Airman_Doors_USAF]

@Zagadka

Man, replace “felons” with “soldiers,” “occupiers,” “insurgents,” or “terrorists” and you’d think this was another Iraq thread.

Killing in war is not a violation of law. If there is an unlawful killing then the person who commits that crime should go directly to jail, if not worse, as that person has violated a much greater responsibility.

And yes, I think while people are incarcerated for violent crimes they should lose their human rights.

[2sense]

@Airman Doors

Human rights? What about the rights of the people that these violent felons killed, crippled, or severely injured? The scumbags that do that sort of thing aren’t human, they’re animals, and should be treated as such.

Again, I could say similar things about Republicans. Our soldiers are killing, crippling, and severely injuring Iraqis every day. Does that make our troops nonhuman? I don’t think so. Unfortunately such behavior is all too human.

[erislover]

@Airman Doors

Killing in war is not a violation of law.

Animals are as animals do. :rolleyes:

And yes, I think while people are incarcerated for violent crimes they should lose their human rights.

Which, specifically? Or all of them? Maybe just shoot them on the spot in the courtroom?

[monstro]

@Airman Doors

The scumbags that do that sort of thing aren’t human, they’re animals, and should be treated as such.

Forever? A person who screwed up in his “wild and woolly” years is still an animal forty years later? I hope God is more forgiving than you are, because they’ll be a lot of people burning in hell if He isn’t.*

Killing in war is not a violation of law.

What if it’s an illegal war? Then can we call the troops–and all those who sent the troops–animals?

I didn’t want to go there, but you left the door standing wide open.

[sub]*I don’t believe in Hell.[/sub]

[MsRobyn]

@Airman Doors

Killing in war is not a violation of law. If there is an unlawful killing then the person who commits that crime should go directly to jail, if not worse, as that person has violated a much greater responsibility.

And yes, I think while people are incarcerated for violent crimes they should lose their human rights.

What if a group of soldiers carried out a brutal massacre on their own, because they can? Or an individual soldier tortured and killed a prisoner in their care? Is that still not a violation of law?

Robin

[Frank]

@Airman Doors

Human rights? What about the rights of the people that these violent felons killed, crippled, or severely injured? The scumbags that do that sort of thing aren’t human, they’re animals, and should be treated as such.

But Airman, you are still assuming that all inmates are the type which you are referencing here. That is simply not true. And even those that are that type, some of those will rejoin society again. The incorrigible element won’t stay in society for long, but what of the others? Shouldn’t they have the ability to fully rejoin society, as a reward for doing good if nothing else?

[Zagadka]

@Airman Doors

And yes, I think while people are incarcerated for violent crimes they should lose their human rights.

How charming. At least you qualified it with “violent crimes” this time.

[threemae]

@TeaElle

Are you suggesting that the majority of Americans engage in these behaviors?

Either you know a particularly downmarket slice of this country or I know a particularly upmarket one, because I can’t think of a single one of my regular associates who could’ve ever been convicted of any of the above. Unless, of course, you’re including “4 year old takes a candy bar from the store without parents’ knowledge” in shoplifting.

I’m not under the impression that you have a very impression of your, “associates.”

[Lissa]

@Airman Doors

I don’t agree that the purpose of prison is rehabilitation.

Having a spouse who works in the corrections system, I can state for a fact that rehabilitation is one of the goals of the system as a whole. Towards this end, there are a myriad of programs to help inmates deal with their anger issues, their substance abuse problems, social/job training issues, and education.

There are new programs which are grouped under the title “Re-Entry” which my husband is helping to impliment in our state. When a prisoner enters the system, an exhaustive analysis of him/her is done, showing the staff which programs and training the inmate needs to become a productive member of society upon release. As the release date nears, these programs facilitate coordination with the communnity in assisting the released inmate find a stable home, job, etc . . . in short, the tools he/she needs in order to get their lives in order and become a responsible member of the community.

I believe it’s for punishment.

It is, but that’s not all there is to it. When you punish your children for misbehavior, is the punishment itself your only intention? Or, are you trying to teach them how to behave properly by instruction on proper behavior and punishment when they misbehave?

If rehabilitation is the purpose, than why do we have such high rates of recidivism?

As my grandma always said, “You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make him drink.”

Rehabilitation only works if the offender wants to change their lives. Frankly, some don’t, and there’s absolutley nothing you can do for a person like that. They will be released, and they will go back to crime, and, eventually, back to prison. But these types are in the minority-- most inmates do go on to have productive lives after prison. They learn that prison is a crappy place to be, and they don’t want to go back. They utilize the tools that the prison has given them in order to become decent members of society.

I don’t see that much rehabilitation happening. If people want to consider themselves rehabilitated, then let them. I don’t believe it, at least until they have gone several years (let’s say 20 or so, just to put a number on it) without committing a crime.

This is a tad unfair, in my opinion. A great many crimes are those of impulse and opprotunity-- something that the person would only do under a set of extreme circumstances unlikely to happen again. Most murders fall under this category, actually. Yes, the people should pay for their crimes, but they’re not really a risk to society after their release.

Since they willfully removed themselves from society, I don’t see any need to allow them to re-enter it so easily.

There, but for the grace of God, go I. In a split second, people sometimes make decisions which can ruin the rest of their lives. After hearing some of the stories of the inmates with whom my husband works, I genuinely feel sorry for some of them. They made terrible choices, and now they must pay for them. But what would I have done if faced with the same circumstances? Sometimes, I’m not so sure that I would have made the correct decision at that moment.