Convicted felons should not retain the right to vote

[WHO IS SERAFIN]

When I was 23 years old I was out and about with a couple guys I'd been hanging out with. We were in my car and one of the guys was driving. We made a stop in an upscale neighborhood where the guys told me we were picking up a bag of weed. I sat in the car while they went in. About 10 minutes later a neighbor pulled his car out and blocked my car in. When he came to my car I rolled down my window and asked what's up? He said he saw what my friends did and I better stay put, because the cops were on their way. Totally confused, I got out of my car and asked him what the hell happened, what was going on??

Turns out, the 2 assholes I was with were not there to buy pot. They pulled a B&E and had emptied the house of a VCR, a stereo, a gaming system and some other stuff. When the cops showed up I told them what I thought we were there for. They laughed and said, "You thought you were gonna get a bag at a JUDGE'S home??! How stupid are you?" The 2 assholes I had been with got their loot then hightailed it across the countryside. The cops called in choppers and dogs to find them. No one believed that I didn't know what was going on and I was convicted of breaking and entering into a judge's home.

Yes I have a felony on my record because of this. Should I not be allowed to vote?

You were innocent and a bad thing happened to you I get that. And thats part of life bad things happen to good people sometimes. That could have happened to anybody.

But the majority of felonies are not mistakes so yes people who commit felonies should never ever see a voting booth ever again. They have proven they cannot not be trusted to do the right thing. Now when they get out of jail they can prove they can live among society and do all the things everyone does but deciding the future of our society, no way!

 

[+paradox]

TL, sounds like you're flip flopping and cherry-picking...

you can't have it both ways...

and one more thing, just because someone is not a felon, doesn't automatically mean they know what they're doing voting wise... so many people that do vote simply vote blindly and ignorantly... yeah, great job non felons, you're way smarter because you don't have a felony on your record... give me a break here...

 

[WHO IS SERAFIN]

TL, sounds like you're flip flopping and cherry-picking...

you can't have it both ways...

and one more thing, just because someone is not a felon, doesn't automatically mean they know what they're doing voting wise... so many people that do vote simply vote blindly and ignorantly... yeah, great job non felons, you're way smarter because you don't have a felony on your record... give me a break here...

What? Nowhere in there am I flip flopping or cherry picking. It may have not been fair she got convicted but that is life.

Maybe and maybe not but I would rather never find out when they made a bad enough life decision to get themselves thrown in jail. Sure people vote blindly but that is there right and not a crime.

 

[+paradox]

yes you are liberty...

and you act like everyone that makes a mistake and a bad choice in life gets caught, which is clearly not the case... just because a person have not got caught breaking the law doesn't mean they are innocent or have not broken the law... shoot, there's so many laws in the usa these days that if you fart the wrong way you'll get beat up by cops and thrown in jail... people that broke no laws get beat up and thrown in jail... your "point" is null and void with a little of ignorance is bliss spice...

 

[DrLeftover]

Part of the problem is the assumption that everybody that 'goes to jail' has been convicted of a Felony. Which is the only type of crime where one does lose their voting rights.

Minor crimes such as: jaywalking, shoplifting, speeding, petty theft, simple assault, public urination, trespassing, and on and on, are NOT Felonies in and of themselves.

Felony
Major criminal act punishable by more than one year in prison. Most jurisdictions world wide distinguish between minor offenses, such as parking tickets, and the more serious crimes, felonies, and then the most violent crimes such as murder. The more serious crimes are often labeled 'capitol offenses' for which the offender may be put to death, or spend life in prison, versus a first felony conviction which may draw a sentence of, for example, three to five years. Also see: Status Offense.
The diversions listed in this Glossary that are usually regarded as felonies include: Bestiality, Child Pornography, Dating Scam, Enzyte, Necrophilia, Obscenity, Pandering, Pedophilia, Quid Pro Quo, Rape, Perjury, Statutory Rape, Sexual Assault, and assorted other Sex Crimes. Compare: Conduct Unbecoming an Officer.

 

[+paradox]

not all felonies are major criminal acts...

some misdemeanors are worse than some felonies...

 

[+paradox]

also, there's a group of minor felonies that are eligible to reinstatement of some rights including the right to vote...

 

[WHO IS SERAFIN]

yes you are liberty...

and you act like everyone that makes a mistake and a bad choice in life gets caught, which is clearly not the case... just because a person have not got caught breaking the law doesn't mean they are innocent or have not broken the law... shoot, there's so many laws in the usa these days that if you fart the wrong way you'll get beat up by cops and thrown in jail... people that broke no laws get beat up and thrown in jail... your "point" is null and void with a little of ignorance is bliss spice...

No I am not in the least. Nowhere above can you point out that I am.

People not getting caught has nothing to do with it. That's like saying people some people do not get caught killing so we should just stop prosecuting killers.

And that's why we have courts for people to prove there innocent.

 

[WHO IS SERAFIN]

Part of the problem is the assumption that everybody that 'goes to jail' has been convicted of a Felony. Which is the only type of crime where one does lose their voting rights.

Minor crimes such as: jaywalking, shoplifting, speeding, petty theft, simple assault, public urination, trespassing, and on and on, are NOT Felonies in and of themselves.

Felony
Major criminal act punishable by more than one year in prison. Most jurisdictions world wide distinguish between minor offenses, such as parking tickets, and the more serious crimes, felonies, and then the most violent crimes such as murder. The more serious crimes are often labeled 'capitol offenses' for which the offender may be put to death, or spend life in prison, versus a first felony conviction which may draw a sentence of, for example, three to five years. Also see: Status Offense.
The diversions listed in this Glossary that are usually regarded as felonies include: Bestiality, Child Pornography, Dating Scam, Enzyte, Necrophilia, Obscenity, Pandering, Pedophilia, Quid Pro Quo, Rape, Perjury, Statutory Rape, Sexual Assault, and assorted other Sex Crimes. Compare: Conduct Unbecoming an Officer.

Well I am not speaking of minor crimes. I do not think you go to jail by jury of your peers for jaywalking.

 

[+paradox]

yes you are liberty...

and you act like everyone that makes a mistake and a bad choice in life gets caught, which is clearly not the case... just because a person have not got caught breaking the law doesn't mean they are innocent or have not broken the law... shoot, there's so many laws in the usa these days that if you fart the wrong way you'll get beat up by cops and thrown in jail... people that broke no laws get beat up and thrown in jail... your "point" is null and void with a little of ignorance is bliss spice...

No I am not in the least. Nowhere above can you point out that I am.

People not getting caught has nothing to do with it. That's like saying people some people do not get caught killing so we should just stop prosecuting killers.

And that's why we have courts for people to prove there innocent.

no, not at all, your point is that criminals shouldn't have the right to vote because they make bad choices in which you claim they can't be trusted in making good choices when it comes to anything including voting, which is clearly not the case because there's people that have criminal records that are way smarter than people that don't... going to jail doesn't prove that they lack intelligence or the lack of making good choices, especially being able to understand the voting process and making a choice in the realm of voting people into office or voting for/against laws...

 

[WHO IS SERAFIN]

I never said anything about there intelligence. I said they made a bad choice in life and that needs to be a permanent to show people there are consequences for not following laws.

 

[DrLeftover]

J's just back to his old habits.

 

[+paradox]

old habits?

of debating in a debate thread?

yeah, okay...

 

[+paradox]

also, the right to vote is not a privilege, it's a constitutional right just like the right to bear arms, freedom of speech, the right to assembly and the freedom of religion... going to jail is not proof that one lacks the ability to vote...

The choice of the word "servitude" interacts intriguingly with the text of the Thirteenth Amendment. That is, "slavery" is prohibited, as is "involuntary servitude except as a punishment for crime." This language certainly foresaw that in the future, convicts might be put to hard labor, as indeed they were. (One recent book remembered the conditions in the 20th-century Parchman Farm prison in Mississippi as "worse than slavery.") But that kind of "servitude" is not mentioned in the Fifteenth Amendment; the omission suggests that conviction of crime in and of itself would not be an acceptable reason for restricting "the right to vote." Even convicted criminals must be afforded the right in its fullest extent.

In this reading, only felons actively serving prison terms could be barred from voting--their "condition of servitude" would be present, not "previous." The laborious process of civil-rights restoration imposed by many states (in 2010, one southern governor briefly proposed a requirement that every free felon write him a personal letter outlining his or her contributions to society) seems contrary not only to the spirit but also to the letter of the Fifteenth Amendment.

One can understand questions about felons on juries. But "the right of citizens of the United States to vote" is more strongly protected in the text than jury service. It is the only right in the Constitution to be protected in terms of "previous condition of servitude." These words demand that we give them a meaning commensurate with their extent.

source

Voting: Right or Privilege?

The Constitution mentions "the right to vote" five times. Judges, and voter ID law proponents, don't seem to be getting the hint

 

[+paradox]

I never said anything about there intelligence. I said they made a bad choice in life and that needs to be a permanent to show people there are consequences for not following laws.

and you said that you're not cherry-picking when you clearly are... you're ignoring my full point and picking out the word 'intelligence" as your key response back to me, which lacks credibility of your debating skills...

no, not at all, your point is that criminals shouldn't have the right to vote because they make bad choices in which you claim they can't be trusted in making good choices when it comes to anything including voting, which is clearly not the case because there's people that have criminal records that are way smarter than people that don't... going to jail doesn't prove that they lack intelligence or the lack of making good choices, especially being able to understand the voting process and making a choice in the realm of voting people into office or voting for/against laws...

the words in bold is what your argument is and the words in underline is my counter to your claim... now you want to try to defend yourself by telling me that you never said anything about "intelligence" yet that word was in my counter point to your claim, not me claiming you're saying it, even though, lets be honest with yourself, you do mean it as it is clear in your arguments against felons voting...

 

[WHO IS SERAFIN]

I never said anything about there intelligence. I said they made a bad choice in life and that needs to be a permanent to show people there are consequences for not following laws.

and you said that you're not cherry-picking when you clearly are... you're ignoring my full point and picking out the word 'intelligence" as your key response back to me, which lacks credibility of your debating skills...

no, not at all, your point is that criminals shouldn't have the right to vote because they make bad choices in which you claim they can't be trusted in making good choices when it comes to anything including voting, which is clearly not the case because there's people that have criminal records that are way smarter than people that don't... going to jail doesn't prove that they lack intelligence or the lack of making good choices, especially being able to understand the voting process and making a choice in the realm of voting people into office or voting for/against laws...

the words in bold is what your argument is and the words in underline is my counter to your claim... now you want to try to defend yourself by telling me that you never said anything about "intelligence" yet that word was in my counter point to your claim, not me claiming you're saying it, even though, lets be honest with yourself, you do mean it as it is clear in your arguments against felons voting...

You are not even making any sense anymore. Show me in my above words where I have changed my mind in anyway. Thats where this all started you saying I am changing my stance some how. Please show me that.

 

[WHO IS SERAFIN]

also, the right to vote is not a privilege, it's a constitutional right just like the right to bear arms, freedom of speech, the right to assembly and the freedom of religion... going to jail is not proof that one lacks the ability to vote...

The choice of the word "servitude" interacts intriguingly with the text of the Thirteenth Amendment. That is, "slavery" is prohibited, as is "involuntary servitude except as a punishment for crime." This language certainly foresaw that in the future, convicts might be put to hard labor, as indeed they were. (One recent book remembered the conditions in the 20th-century Parchman Farm prison in Mississippi as "worse than slavery.") But that kind of "servitude" is not mentioned in the Fifteenth Amendment; the omission suggests that conviction of crime in and of itself would not be an acceptable reason for restricting "the right to vote." Even convicted criminals must be afforded the right in its fullest extent.

In this reading, only felons actively serving prison terms could be barred from voting--their "condition of servitude" would be present, not "previous." The laborious process of civil-rights restoration imposed by many states (in 2010, one southern governor briefly proposed a requirement that every free felon write him a personal letter outlining his or her contributions to society) seems contrary not only to the spirit but also to the letter of the Fifteenth Amendment.

One can understand questions about felons on juries. But "the right of citizens of the United States to vote" is more strongly protected in the text than jury service. It is the only right in the Constitution to be protected in terms of "previous condition of servitude." These words demand that we give them a meaning commensurate with their extent.

source

Voting: Right or Privilege?

The Constitution mentions "the right to vote" five times. Judges, and voter ID law proponents, don't seem to be getting the hint

Like anything you loose that constitutional right if you break laws. You do not ever get back your 2nd amendment right in many cases if you go to jail committing certain crimes. Where are all the leftists screaming they did there time give that ex bank robber his gun back! I think Hypocrites would be a word to describe that.

 

[+paradox]

also, the right to vote is not a privilege, it's a constitutional right just like the right to bear arms, freedom of speech, the right to assembly and the freedom of religion... going to jail is not proof that one lacks the ability to vote...

The choice of the word "servitude" interacts intriguingly with the text of the Thirteenth Amendment. That is, "slavery" is prohibited, as is "involuntary servitude except as a punishment for crime." This language certainly foresaw that in the future, convicts might be put to hard labor, as indeed they were. (One recent book remembered the conditions in the 20th-century Parchman Farm prison in Mississippi as "worse than slavery.") But that kind of "servitude" is not mentioned in the Fifteenth Amendment; the omission suggests that conviction of crime in and of itself would not be an acceptable reason for restricting "the right to vote." Even convicted criminals must be afforded the right in its fullest extent.

In this reading, only felons actively serving prison terms could be barred from voting--their "condition of servitude" would be present, not "previous." The laborious process of civil-rights restoration imposed by many states (in 2010, one southern governor briefly proposed a requirement that every free felon write him a personal letter outlining his or her contributions to society) seems contrary not only to the spirit but also to the letter of the Fifteenth Amendment.

One can understand questions about felons on juries. But "the right of citizens of the United States to vote" is more strongly protected in the text than jury service. It is the only right in the Constitution to be protected in terms of "previous condition of servitude." These words demand that we give them a meaning commensurate with their extent.

source

Voting: Right or Privilege?

The Constitution mentions "the right to vote" five times. Judges, and voter ID law proponents, don't seem to be getting the hint

Like anything you loose that constitutional right if you break laws. You do not ever get back your 2nd amendment right in many cases if you go to jail committing certain crimes. Where are all the leftists screaming they did there time give that ex bank robber his gun back! I think Hypocrites would be a word to describe that.

see, there you go again, cherry-picking about the right to bear arms when that's not what we are discussing... i mentioned the right to bear arms only once because i was clearly naming some of the rights that all americans have under the constitution because the OP said that voting is a privilege, which is not correct... we are talking about the right to vote, and voting is not dangerous, voting is good not bad... stop trying to change the subject...

and on another note, give me proof that anyone, let alone a "leftist" is demanding to give guns to an ex bank robber? i think you're just making stuff up out of your ass to try to demonize democrats/liberals in a distasteful way... now, i can understand not giving bank robbers their guns back, but denying people their right to vote after they did their time is simply wrong... after-all, when people get out of jail/prison, do they need to get a job and do other things that everyone does? so, if you don't want to give people the benefit of the doubt, then i guess deny all criminals of a job so they can't feed themselves, right? that's what your logic is, right? and like i said, everyone makes bad choices and breaks the law, it's a matter of getting caught or not... just because people don't go to jail doesn't mean they never break the law or better at making choices than people that do get caught...

anyways, you're the type of person that screams out fraud when indeed you're in the business of fraud, i.e. strongly against marriage when you're in one... very logical...

 

[+paradox]

I never said anything about there intelligence. I said they made a bad choice in life and that needs to be a permanent to show people there are consequences for not following laws.

and you said that you're not cherry-picking when you clearly are... you're ignoring my full point and picking out the word 'intelligence" as your key response back to me, which lacks credibility of your debating skills...

no, not at all, your point is that criminals shouldn't have the right to vote because they make bad choices in which you claim they can't be trusted in making good choices when it comes to anything including voting, which is clearly not the case because there's people that have criminal records that are way smarter than people that don't... going to jail doesn't prove that they lack intelligence or the lack of making good choices, especially being able to understand the voting process and making a choice in the realm of voting people into office or voting for/against laws...

the words in bold is what your argument is and the words in underline is my counter to your claim... now you want to try to defend yourself by telling me that you never said anything about "intelligence" yet that word was in my counter point to your claim, not me claiming you're saying it, even though, lets be honest with yourself, you do mean it as it is clear in your arguments against felons voting...

You are not even making any sense anymore. Show me in my above words where I have changed my mind in anyway. Thats where this all started you saying I am changing my stance some how. Please show me that.

i just clearly explained how you cherry-picked in this case, you cherry-picked one world, "intelligence"... jesus christ can you read and comprehend simple english?

 

[WHO IS SERAFIN]

I never said anything about there intelligence. I said they made a bad choice in life and that needs to be a permanent to show people there are consequences for not following laws.

and you said that you're not cherry-picking when you clearly are... you're ignoring my full point and picking out the word 'intelligence" as your key response back to me, which lacks credibility of your debating skills...

no, not at all, your point is that criminals shouldn't have the right to vote because they make bad choices in which you claim they can't be trusted in making good choices when it comes to anything including voting, which is clearly not the case because there's people that have criminal records that are way smarter than people that don't... going to jail doesn't prove that they lack intelligence or the lack of making good choices, especially being able to understand the voting process and making a choice in the realm of voting people into office or voting for/against laws...

the words in bold is what your argument is and the words in underline is my counter to your claim... now you want to try to defend yourself by telling me that you never said anything about "intelligence" yet that word was in my counter point to your claim, not me claiming you're saying it, even though, lets be honest with yourself, you do mean it as it is clear in your arguments against felons voting...

You are not even making any sense anymore. Show me in my above words where I have changed my mind in anyway. Thats where this all started you saying I am changing my stance some how. Please show me that.

i just clearly explained how you cherry-picked in this case, you cherry-picked one world, "intelligence"... jesus christ can you read and comprehend simple english?

Once again making absolutely no sense on how I changed my stance. But keep trying to make it look that way. Once again If you go to jail by a jury of your peers you lose your right to vote. No exceptions.