[GoneForNow]

Its rather simple, its called punishment. If you don't like then you can always petition to change it within your state.

[jmosmith]

Originally Posted by gbrumb

Its rather simple, its called punishment. If you don't like then you can always petition to change it within your state.

So a criminal's "debt to society" is nevery fully paid?

Then why do we call it the "Department of Corrections", rather than the "Department of Life-Long PUNISHMENT"

[GoneForNow]

Originally Posted by jmosmith

So a criminal's "debt to society" is nevery fully paid?

Correct, its not a cash based system. You can't pay in full, ever.

[grandpaw7]

It clearly does not make good sense to bar all felons who have served their time from voting. One indication of this is the juvenile nature of the reasons given for the ban.

[jmosmith]

Originally Posted by gbrumb

Correct, its not a cash based system. You can't pay in full, ever.

But is that proportionate to the crime?

[Rockn]

It all comes down, once again, to personal responsibility. Ignorance of the law is no excuse and I am more than sure that the majority of felons knew the consequences of their actions while in commission of the crime. You guys are all over these white collar criminals and their dirty deeds(former Enron CEO for example), but seem to now be willing to forgive their transgressions. You only seem to want the punishment to fit the crime when it suits your political agenda.

[GoneForNow]

Originally Posted by jmosmith

But is that proportionate to the crime?

If you read the article posted by linskyjack from the Washington Compost, based upon the number of states that prevent felons from voting the answer would appear to be a resounding "yes".

[Miz]

This map shows which states disenfranchise felons for life. There are only four...AL, FL, KY, VA.

As I vaguely recall (there's a convicted felon in my family as well as a practicing lawyer...we're a well-rouded group ), a convicted felon can petition to have his/her voting rights...as well as some other civil rights...restored. Some states restore them automatically after a set period of time after the sentence (including any parole) is served. I'm far too lazy to look up the details, though.

[jmosmith]

Originally Posted by gbrumb

If you read the article posted by linskyjack from the Washington Compost, based upon the number of states that prevent felons from voting the answer would appear to be a resounding "yes".

And popular opinion so frequently gets things exactly right,... Especually questions of legal philosphy

...which they don't actually, and that's why it was seen fitting that Federal Judges be appointed, not elected.

So again, is that proportionate? (do YOU think so?) Or is a case by case basis more equitable?

Thanks
J

[Mulderator]

Originally Posted by grandpaw7

It clearly does not make good sense to bar all felons who have served their time from voting. One indication of this is the juvenile nature of the reasons given for the ban.

Juvenile nature? So I assume you have no problem with Skilling voting. I'm sure you don't mind Lay voting since he's dead now--that's always a good source for Democratic votes.

The reason is not juvenile at all. Committing a crime is an indicator of moral turpitude--you know--the reason you want Skilling and Lay to do life in prison. You let child molesters start voting and they start trying to change the laws requiring their identity to be known to the families that live in their neighborhoods--you may have no problem with that, but committing a felony is a serious offense--you pay your debt to society for the offense--it doesn't change the fact there is a problem with your moral character if you committed the offense in the first place.

Its quite simple--you want to vote, you want to own a gun, you want a spot on a board of directors of a public company, you don't commit a felony.

Let me ask you--when Skilling gets our of prison, do you have a problem with him being permanently banned from ever being able to have a securities license or serve on a board of directors?

I thought so!

[Mulderator]

Originally Posted by jmosmith

And popular opinion so frequently gets things exactly right,... Especually questions of legal philosphy

...which they don't actually, and that's why it was seen fitting that Federal Judges be appointed, not elected.

So again, is that proportionate? (do YOU think so?) Or is a case by case basis more equitable?

Thanks
J

It is a protection for society. Most felons are not of very good moral character (which is why they are felons). That's why we don't let them have licenses to practice law in many states or to hold positions of trust such as sitting on a board of directors. Voting is also an imporant privilege. You can't be picking and choosing which felon has reformed himself--you just don't take a chance.

[valley]

Originally Posted by jmosmith

So a criminal's "debt to society" is nevery fully paid?

the thing is...even if the person has paid his debt, is reformed and has totally changed and has learned his lesson, the fact remains that in some states, the permanent loss of the right to vote is considered to be a part of the debt they have to pay.

Then why do we call it the "Department of Corrections", rather than the "Department of Life-Long PUNISHMENT"

Do you believe that any real correction goes on in prisons anyways?

[jmosmith]

Originally Posted by Mulder

It is a protection for society. Most felons are not of very good moral character (which is why they are felons). That's why we don't let them have licenses to practice law in many states or to hold positions of trust such as sitting on a board of directors. Voting is also an imporant privilege. You can't be picking and choosing which felon has reformed himself--you just don't take a chance.

But what if we chose what issues they could vote on? Surely the moral depravity you speak of would not be too much of a problem for votes on taxes? (It might even be a bonus!? )

I understand that most felonies are pretty nasty, but there are some which are not. If you lie on your taxes, and put them in the mail, that's Mail and Wire Fraud, and that's a felony. How many existing Doctors and Lawyers would be guilty of that?

Anyway. Thanks for considering the question, and the good answers.

I don't think I'll be making any petitions to chage this anytime soon. Though I wonder what influence this disenfranchisement has on the reform process, and residivism? (By making a feeling of permanent separation from society -- does that make it easier to see it as more of a "me versus them" proposition when it comes to committing crime again?)

[jmosmith]

Originally Posted by valley

...Do you believe that any real correction goes on in prisons anyways?

not a chance!

[lighthouse]

A dishonest person would take the wrongly sent Poll card(s) to the ballot station and use it (them) to vote. I didn't in 1992.