Noice
we live in a country where robbing a convenience store prevents you from voting, but gerrymandering doesn’t.
It’s funny how power is more important than reality. Let’s wait a few decades and see if power can overcome environmental collapse caused by its efforts for more power.
So weird that that taking away voting rights permanently is a thing in the US. I might… maybe… understand suspending it while someone is under scentence or on probation. But even then, they are your citizens.
I feel the same way.
In Germany voting rights can be restricted only in very serious cases like high treason (like inciting a mob to storm and overthrow a lawfully elected government). And it doesnt happen automatically or permanently. It needs a separate judgment for up to 5 years.
In the US you just have to find a way to criminalise your opposition and throw them all into prison. Other autocratic countries already do this en mass.
Louisiana will even permanently remove parts of your body if they think you raped a child without marrying them first.
“An offender could refuse to get the surgery, but would then be sentenced to three to five years of an additional prison sentence without the possibility of getting out early.”
It’s elective in the rare heinous cases it would be applied in.
Weird yes. But completely logical when you wrongfully arrest black people for crimes they didn’t commit.
Honest question: Is Trump actually allowed to vote in the upcoming election?
I’m absolutely against restricting voting rights. But in this case I’d see it as some kind of higher justice done.
For convictions in other states, Florida law defers to the laws in those states. New York will only prevent him from voting while he’s actually in prison.
If your vote can be taken away, people in power have an incentive to criminalize their political rivals.
Everyone, including criminals, should be able to vote or run for presidency. In the end, what’s a crime and what’s not is decided by the law, which is made by the politicians. What’s to stop a president from making something illegal for the sole purpose of making their opponents criminals so they are guaranteed a win next election?
If a president can do that, there’s something wrong with the way your government is set up. I disagree, it affects personality cults the most and if it’s about the issues that you care about, there should be no shortage of candidates. This is someone you are electing to lead your country for four years. I would concede that it does depend on the severity of the crime.
We’ve regressed to Facebook rage comics
What do you think the whole Wojak thing are.
alwayshasbeen.jpg
Except this one is funny
Taking away the rights of felons to vote makes their incarceration unjust by its nature, and just makes it might equals right.
But Americans have always had a raging, hateful vengeance boner to feel better about our nation built by slaves on top of our genocide victims.
A civilized nation would want their citizens who made a mistake, often because society failed them, to be rehabilitated and thrive.
We don’t do that here. Our ex-cons are set up for failure after already going in desperate. Then every conservative and a majority of neoliberals cheers when they do, like it’s a victory for them.
You can talk about all the world’s depots and dictators, but we still have the largest population of incarcerated citizens on Earth, and not even per capita. More of our people are in bondage than even China with its billion people. We found the…🤮…private profit in it.
Not exactly, just because they can’t vote now doesn’t mean they never could but yeah it kinda reinforces the status quo by eliminating competition.
I wholeheartedly agree with rehabilitation though
But I get a bit more extreme than most people like I see absolutely no benefit in locking people up, like at all. The only goal of incarceration should be rehabilitation anything less is a waste of resources and if there is no hope of rehabilitation well let’s just say that’s where me and the masses opinion differ.
It’s MORE important for a prisoner to have a say in the laws keeping them imprisoned for those laws to be just.
Let’s say a new fascist regime says everyone with green eyes goes to jail. That’s a lot of people who think that law is unjust who are now just voiceless slaves, it’s self-perpetuating. Now use this for civil rights, LGBT, on and on. Revoking a citizen’s vote in addition to their freedom demonstrates how a perceived right gets devalued to an easily revokable privilege.
Its essential for any society that claims to value democracy, like the democratic republic we play pretend we are, to maximize enfranchisement, especially to those that fall subject to punishment of our laws.
But let’s be honest. We don’t even get a vote on the economy, just 2 bribed parties that differ on the social issue symptom management of said economy. We were never what we claimed and believed ourselves to be at any point. We’re a gold plated, antisocial garbage oligarchy.
You didn’t see any benefit in locking up people like Donald Trump and Jeffrey Dahmer?
I’ll be the first the point out that many—perhaps most—felons aren’t dangerous, but some of them clearly are.
“A society should be judged not by how it treats its outstanding citizens but by how it treats its criminals.” - Dostoyevsky
Yes we need politicians holding rallies in prisons, catering to the felon vote. “Vote for me, get amnesty.”
Holy strawman
The point of prison should be to lock up and keep an eye on criminals for a time, rehab and reintegrate them into society.
Removing all tethers to the outside world and treating them as sub humans and animals will just make them behave like such.
Case in point, pretty much all prison systems in the world, except the Nordics.Honestly if society locked me in a cage for years and treated me as America treats its prisoners, and my work as a psychologist got me a front row seat, I would do everything I could to to work against said society when I got out. You can’t treat others as enemies and expect anything but the same in kind.
The Nordic model of you made a mistake, you need to be punished, but what can we do during that punishment to make sure you won’t need to resort to that again is the only rational and civilized path.
And the rational, barbaric, uncivilized path would be to just kill people if we refuse to make the effort to rehabilitate them.
We in the US choose option 3 because it’s profitable. Irrationally provide no rehabilitation, make them MORE bitter and antisocial by forcing them live in inhuman conditions and to work for free as slaves (a dollar or less an hour is effectively free), then release them and see them in a month for more slave labor.
At this point, I have to assume our insane recitivism rate is by design.
Exactly, and don’t even get me started on private prisons! Making people miserable and keeping them there is the whole point.
For a country that began with “no taxation without representation” it’s a huge hypocrisy to take away a person’s voting rights yet expect him to continue contributing.
