Should Prisoners Have The Right To Vote?
Should Prisoners have the right to vote?
Do you think that people that are imprisoned because they were incapable to follow the law, should have the same rights as law abiding citizens? After doing some thorough research I have come to the conclusion that people who cannot seem to follow the simple laws set in place by the federal governments all over the world, then no, they should no longer obtain the right to vote in a democratic election poll. Voting rights have always been a controversial issue in politics, and not only for prisoners. In places like Europe leaders of the government have taken action in getting Statutes or governmental acts passed to make prisoners unable to vote while they are incarcerated since the late 1900’s. In the …show more content…
lines of these statutes that were passed the criminals do however get their citizen rights back and are then again allowed to participate in the acts of a free person.
In The House of Commons that is a part of the parliament of the United Kingdom which consists of 650 elected members of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, which meets in the Palace of Westminster, on February the tenth in the year of 2011 Jack Straw and David Davis were set by the MP’s (Members of Parliament) to put forth the opposition of lifting the ban on prisoners being able to vote. Davis states that he believes the blanket rule is “Uniform justice.. As a result, you have broken the contract with society to such a serious extent that you have lost all of those rights - your liberty and your right to vote” (Watt). The ban had been set in place in October of 2005, it had begun with a court debate on the issue that had been introduced in 1870 by Britain, whom stated granting the ability to vote to prisoners that would be imprisoned for less than 4 years along with granting the judge ability to revoke this right at any time. On the other hand Juliet Lyon of the Prison Reform Trust doesn’t agree with the blanket, she feels that the message it sends is poor and outdated, she feels prisoners should be able to vote in prison because it is a place of “rehabilitation and respect for the rule of law” (Watt).
It is rather easy to look at it from that point of view, but you have to think deeper into the issue, for example the mind state that these people are currently in due to the situation they have placed themselves in.
Think about the types of people that fill jail cells and prison cells, the poor, the mentally ill, the illiterate, the drug addicts, the people that participate in degrading acts such as murder, rape, etc. All people who obviously care more about the social aspects that life has to offer rather than participating inhumane acts such as having a voice in your political system. People that are convicted felons have showed that they are not capable of making an important decision wisely, like Roger Clegg, president of a conservative advocacy group, states “If you aren't willing to follow the law, you can’t claim the right to make the law for everyone else” (Holding). I do however believe that prisoners should get an education at some point, so when they are released they can be a valuable asset to the world rather than being idle accession to the delinquent population. Why should we allow inmates to withhold the constitutional right to vote, when they were committing a crime(s) that caused them to now be incarcerated they were not thinking of laws or the constitution. So with the decision of breaking the law, they, as citizens, have then decided to hand over their freedoms to the federal government and the court system to now put in time for their
crime.
Throughout the United States, different states have begun to pass laws and set state felon voting policies. On April the 16, 2013 and act was passed in the state of Delaware, which is called the Hazel D. Plant Voter Restoration Act, with a vote of 15 (pass) and 6 (veto). This act proclaims that the 5 year wait time for felons being able to vote is now over with the exception of felons that are convicted of the following will not be able to regain their ability to vote; murder, manslaughter, offence against public administration involving bribery, abuse of office, and sexual offence. In the state of Florida on March 9, 2011 the rules had gotten tougher, any persons that were convicted of any offence have to apply for executive clemency after a five year waiting period. As for felons convicted of harsher crimes such as murder, child abuse, drug trafficking, etc. have to attend a clemency board hearing after a seven year waiting period in order to determine whether or not the ability to vote with be reinforced upon the felon or not. November 24, 2015 in the state of Kentucky Steven L. Beshear issued an order that automatically reinstated the right to vote to convicted non-violent felons after they have completed the punishments set forth for their crime, however convicted violent felons must individually apply to have their voting right reinstated through the governor. In Nevada non-violent felons have their voting rights automatically reinstated after the completion of their sentence, but violent felons and all second time felony offenders have to go to the court in which they were convicted in to regain their voting abilities. (State Felon)
Congress has presented a bill that prohibits states from making laws against felons being able to obtain the right to vote more than just once, but it has not passed. Roger Clegg wrote an article and in that article he discussed how people like children, non US citizens and the mentally incompetent do not have a ability to vote and this is due to the fact that they cannot meet the minimum requirement of trustworthiness, the commitment to the laws, and the responsibility of participating in choosing whom will run what in our country. (Clegg) I feel that convicted felons violent or not, do not meet these requirements either, they cannot be trusted obviously they broke the law to a high extent that they are now identified in society as a felon, along with that they do not have to ability to commit to the laws set in place, and they are incapable of handling the responsibility of engaging in the act of voting in a democratic election poll. Clegg feels that the reinstatement of this right to a convicted felon should not just be handed over, he feels that it should be a careful process that runs through a case by case basis with the court system, evaluating things such as how serious the crime was, when it was committed, and it there a pattern to the crimes that the felon has been convicted of. Voting is not the only restriction placed upon free convicted felons, they are not allowed to participate or serve on a jury in court and they cannot by any means purchase or possess a firearm.
Some might argue that laws like these that are enforced are rather racist or sexist, but they are not, southern states in earlier times, however did have laws passed based on your racial status but they are no longer enforced. Along with these laws no longer being in place, laws that are being enforced today are rooted in ancient Greece and Rome and colonist from England have set them in place with absolutely no racist or discriminatory intent. A population count done in 2013 calculated that in prison the population of Caucasians is 33 percent, blacks is 36 percent, and Hispanics is 22 percent, this study shows that the population of Caucasians, blacks, and Hispanics is very precise throughout the prisons in the United States showing that racial discrimination is just not being set in place or used the law force. (Are Felon..)
Now back to the UK and its Parliament, the 234 to 22 vote on leaving the blanket ban set in place was an issue noticed and taken into consideration by many made a big deal in the issue of prisoners having the right to vote along with citizens that have chosen to abide by the laws set and keep their freedom. The prime minister once stated that allowing convicted prisoners to vote made him feel physically ill. The Strasbourg court, which has no affiliation with European Court System, the 47 members that are apart of this court system are however represent states that are apart of European Court countries. The EU (European Court) has been in many legal battles over this topic and this branch of members feel that the ban in the UK is completely against human rights. (Little) On the topic of human rights, these convicted inmates that they are fighting for have crossed the line of human rights and have broken laws that have been initiated by the country's governmental system, so why should they be allowed to cross the line of their human rights and freedom and still be allowed access to these rights? Ministers have responded to these calls for lifting the ban by publishing a Bill, which contains options like allowing prisoners to vote, if their sentence is less than six months or less than four years, or just leaving the total ban, that the Parliament now has to vote on. Some of the MPs feel that the Prime MInister has the right and that he should stand up and follow through with not allowing inmates the ability to participate in governmental voting polls.
Now, looking at everything that has been pointed out, convicted criminals do not have the ability and should not be granted the ability to vote solely for the reasons of their actions and clearly poor decision making in society. If a citizen do not obtain the responsibility and trust to follow the laws set in place by governments all over the world, then they should not be in power of the responsibility and the trust to make the right decision for the country/state in a voting poll. Laws are put in place for a reason, they test who can and cannot abide by the system, and those who cannot are then incarcerated and put under a stricter rule and strong monitoring. Once freedom is taken from a person why should we then allow them to make decisions that will affect every single person that still is in control of their own freedom, exactly, we shouldn’t.
Do you think that people that are imprisoned because they were incapable to follow the law, should have the same rights as law abiding citizens? After doing some thorough research I have come to the conclusion that people who cannot seem to follow the simple laws set in place by the federal governments all over the world, then no, they should no longer obtain the right to vote in a democratic election poll. Voting rights have always been a controversial issue in politics, and not only for prisoners. In places like Europe leaders of the government have taken action in getting Statutes or governmental acts passed to make prisoners unable to vote while they are incarcerated since the late 1900’s. In the …show more content…
lines of these statutes that were passed the criminals do however get their citizen rights back and are then again allowed to participate in the acts of a free person.
In The House of Commons that is a part of the parliament of the United Kingdom which consists of 650 elected members of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, which meets in the Palace of Westminster, on February the tenth in the year of 2011 Jack Straw and David Davis were set by the MP’s (Members of Parliament) to put forth the opposition of lifting the ban on prisoners being able to vote. Davis states that he believes the blanket rule is “Uniform justice.. As a result, you have broken the contract with society to such a serious extent that you have lost all of those rights - your liberty and your right to vote” (Watt). The ban had been set in place in October of 2005, it had begun with a court debate on the issue that had been introduced in 1870 by Britain, whom stated granting the ability to vote to prisoners that would be imprisoned for less than 4 years along with granting the judge ability to revoke this right at any time. On the other hand Juliet Lyon of the Prison Reform Trust doesn’t agree with the blanket, she feels that the message it sends is poor and outdated, she feels prisoners should be able to vote in prison because it is a place of “rehabilitation and respect for the rule of law” (Watt).
It is rather easy to look at it from that point of view, but you have to think deeper into the issue, for example the mind state that these people are currently in due to the situation they have placed themselves in.
Think about the types of people that fill jail cells and prison cells, the poor, the mentally ill, the illiterate, the drug addicts, the people that participate in degrading acts such as murder, rape, etc. All people who obviously care more about the social aspects that life has to offer rather than participating inhumane acts such as having a voice in your political system. People that are convicted felons have showed that they are not capable of making an important decision wisely, like Roger Clegg, president of a conservative advocacy group, states “If you aren't willing to follow the law, you can’t claim the right to make the law for everyone else” (Holding). I do however believe that prisoners should get an education at some point, so when they are released they can be a valuable asset to the world rather than being idle accession to the delinquent population. Why should we allow inmates to withhold the constitutional right to vote, when they were committing a crime(s) that caused them to now be incarcerated they were not thinking of laws or the constitution. So with the decision of breaking the law, they, as citizens, have then decided to hand over their freedoms to the federal government and the court system to now put in time for their
crime.
Throughout the United States, different states have begun to pass laws and set state felon voting policies. On April the 16, 2013 and act was passed in the state of Delaware, which is called the Hazel D. Plant Voter Restoration Act, with a vote of 15 (pass) and 6 (veto). This act proclaims that the 5 year wait time for felons being able to vote is now over with the exception of felons that are convicted of the following will not be able to regain their ability to vote; murder, manslaughter, offence against public administration involving bribery, abuse of office, and sexual offence. In the state of Florida on March 9, 2011 the rules had gotten tougher, any persons that were convicted of any offence have to apply for executive clemency after a five year waiting period. As for felons convicted of harsher crimes such as murder, child abuse, drug trafficking, etc. have to attend a clemency board hearing after a seven year waiting period in order to determine whether or not the ability to vote with be reinforced upon the felon or not. November 24, 2015 in the state of Kentucky Steven L. Beshear issued an order that automatically reinstated the right to vote to convicted non-violent felons after they have completed the punishments set forth for their crime, however convicted violent felons must individually apply to have their voting right reinstated through the governor. In Nevada non-violent felons have their voting rights automatically reinstated after the completion of their sentence, but violent felons and all second time felony offenders have to go to the court in which they were convicted in to regain their voting abilities. (State Felon)
Congress has presented a bill that prohibits states from making laws against felons being able to obtain the right to vote more than just once, but it has not passed. Roger Clegg wrote an article and in that article he discussed how people like children, non US citizens and the mentally incompetent do not have a ability to vote and this is due to the fact that they cannot meet the minimum requirement of trustworthiness, the commitment to the laws, and the responsibility of participating in choosing whom will run what in our country. (Clegg) I feel that convicted felons violent or not, do not meet these requirements either, they cannot be trusted obviously they broke the law to a high extent that they are now identified in society as a felon, along with that they do not have to ability to commit to the laws set in place, and they are incapable of handling the responsibility of engaging in the act of voting in a democratic election poll. Clegg feels that the reinstatement of this right to a convicted felon should not just be handed over, he feels that it should be a careful process that runs through a case by case basis with the court system, evaluating things such as how serious the crime was, when it was committed, and it there a pattern to the crimes that the felon has been convicted of. Voting is not the only restriction placed upon free convicted felons, they are not allowed to participate or serve on a jury in court and they cannot by any means purchase or possess a firearm.
Some might argue that laws like these that are enforced are rather racist or sexist, but they are not, southern states in earlier times, however did have laws passed based on your racial status but they are no longer enforced. Along with these laws no longer being in place, laws that are being enforced today are rooted in ancient Greece and Rome and colonist from England have set them in place with absolutely no racist or discriminatory intent. A population count done in 2013 calculated that in prison the population of Caucasians is 33 percent, blacks is 36 percent, and Hispanics is 22 percent, this study shows that the population of Caucasians, blacks, and Hispanics is very precise throughout the prisons in the United States showing that racial discrimination is just not being set in place or used the law force. (Are Felon..)
Now back to the UK and its Parliament, the 234 to 22 vote on leaving the blanket ban set in place was an issue noticed and taken into consideration by many made a big deal in the issue of prisoners having the right to vote along with citizens that have chosen to abide by the laws set and keep their freedom. The prime minister once stated that allowing convicted prisoners to vote made him feel physically ill. The Strasbourg court, which has no affiliation with European Court System, the 47 members that are apart of this court system are however represent states that are apart of European Court countries. The EU (European Court) has been in many legal battles over this topic and this branch of members feel that the ban in the UK is completely against human rights. (Little) On the topic of human rights, these convicted inmates that they are fighting for have crossed the line of human rights and have broken laws that have been initiated by the country's governmental system, so why should they be allowed to cross the line of their human rights and freedom and still be allowed access to these rights? Ministers have responded to these calls for lifting the ban by publishing a Bill, which contains options like allowing prisoners to vote, if their sentence is less than six months or less than four years, or just leaving the total ban, that the Parliament now has to vote on. Some of the MPs feel that the Prime MInister has the right and that he should stand up and follow through with not allowing inmates the ability to participate in governmental voting polls.
Now, looking at everything that has been pointed out, convicted criminals do not have the ability and should not be granted the ability to vote solely for the reasons of their actions and clearly poor decision making in society. If a citizen do not obtain the responsibility and trust to follow the laws set in place by governments all over the world, then they should not be in power of the responsibility and the trust to make the right decision for the country/state in a voting poll. Laws are put in place for a reason, they test who can and cannot abide by the system, and those who cannot are then incarcerated and put under a stricter rule and strong monitoring. Once freedom is taken from a person why should we then allow them to make decisions that will affect every single person that still is in control of their own freedom, exactly, we shouldn’t.