|
I can't think of a single reason to not let felons vote.
Eggplant Squire fucked around with this message at 03:14 on Aug 20, 2015 |
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 03:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 16:08 |
|
|
Jagchosis posted:Maybe it should be the responsibility of the armed people serving the public and paid by public money to deescalate potentially violent situations and not violently attack civilians. Maybe. I'm normally pretty skeptical of the police, but when you say things like that given the video, I think you actually do a disservice to the cause. She was "unconscious" on a stretcher when she jumped up and ran at the cops. There are plenty of videos of cops slamming restrained prisoners' heads into walls. Pick one of them to hang your hat on.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 03:26
|
|
|
Radish posted:I can't think of a single reason to not let felons vote. 1. You broke the social contract, so you don't get to help re-write it?
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 03:27
|
|
|
Radish posted:I can't think of a single reason to not let felons vote. So the rural areas they're incarcerated in can get extra representation at their expense? To systematically disenfranchise minorities by convicting them at disproportional rates? To reduce the influence of people who are generally seen as undesirable by the rest of society? There are plenty of reasons.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 03:27
|
|
|
blarzgh posted:1. You broke the social contract, so you don't get to help re-write it? That's a pretty stupid reason.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 03:30
|
|
|
I get the impression that people in this thread, when it really comes down to it, think that police overall are worse for society than criminals.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 03:31
|
|
|
Radish posted:That's a pretty stupid reason. Why?
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 03:31
|
|
|
blarzgh posted:1. You broke the social contract, so you don't get to help re-write it? Rehabilitation is impossible, all felonies should be life sentences, got it
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 03:33
|
|
|
Radish posted:I can't think of a single reason to not let felons vote. Keep in mind I'm not trying say that your reasons are the same AR, it's just that alot of people feel that felons should not vote because they know 1) that police help "keep their heads down" [specifically target minorities like in Ferguson] and 2) that after you have been processed by the system and been through jail/court/what-not, you are probably going to vote more Blue/Left seeing that alot of prison reform/social reform & the like are going to be on the blue tickets.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 03:34
|
|
|
You're the one saying we should remove voting rights from people which should have a pretty high standard. It should require a better reason than some nebulous "they did a bad thing so now they don't get to have a say in how they are governed" one especially after the justice system has deemed them fit to return to society.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 03:35
|
|
|
blarzgh posted:I get the impression that people in this thread, when it really comes down to it, think that police overall are worse for society than criminals. Why don't you quote those people, instead of referring to some nebulous "people in this thread"?
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 03:36
|
|
|
blarzgh posted:I get the impression that people in this thread, when it really comes down to it, think that police overall are worse for society than criminals. No we just hold police to a higher standard than criminals.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 03:36
|
|
|
blarzgh posted:I get the impression that people in this thread, when it really comes down to it, think that police overall are worse for society than criminals. The police in this country? It can be a tough call sometimes, yes. I mean we did literally watch a guy get choked to death a year back with absolutely no repercussion. I think of we're seeing suspects dying on camera and nothing comes of it, we as a nation really don't have the moral high ground we seem to think we do.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 03:37
|
|
|
blarzgh posted:1. You broke the social contract, so you don't get to help re-write it?
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 03:38
|
|
|
blarzgh posted:1. You broke the social contract, so you don't get to help re-write it? It's still a weak argument.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 03:42
|
|
|
DARPA posted:We don't send people to prison for breaking the social contract. We send them to prison after (or before, if they're poor) convictions for breaking the law. The Law is our social contract. Like, the literal set of rules we agree with each other to abide by. VitalSigns posted:Rehabilitation is impossible, all felonies should be life sentences, got it If everyone in Mississippi agrees that felons shouldn't get to vote, what's wrong with that. Just because you wouldn't vote that way doesn't mean you think they shouldn't be allowed to, does it?
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 03:44
|
|
|
Ravenfood posted:At the absolute best, this is an argument for not letting felons vote while they are incarcerated. It should have no bearing on their rights after they are released. And that's at the absolute best. You say, "its a weak argument" as if there is an argument to be had - like there is a 'right' answer. Why can't a democracy decide that it's possible to forfeit the right to participate in certain respects?
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 03:49
|
|
|
Permanently stripping voting rights from people is bad government policy and is bad for democracy. Ex-convicts still have concerns that need to be addressed and taking away their say in government means there is no incentive for a politician to address problems that affect them. 2.5% of Americans are not going to elect Jeffrey Dahmer to office all by themselves or whatever people worried about felon voters seem to think. Disenfranchising them just makes it risky for politicians to advocate reform because they can't get votes from the people it's helping but can lose votes over it. blarzgh posted:If everyone in Mississippi agrees that felons shouldn't get to vote, what's wrong with that. So it is impossible to pass a bad law, is what you're saying, because if a law is passed it is by definition good. Yeah we've certainly never had problems with that view in Mississippi. We've only had to amend the constitution multiple times to overrule the will of Mississippi voters on who should get to vote.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 03:51
|
|
|
blarzgh posted:1. You broke the social contract, so you don't get to help re-write it? quote:"Felony convictions have some pretty serious job implications for someone in Mr. Erzinger's profession, and that entered into it," Hurlbert said. "When you're talking about restitution, you don't want to take away his ability to pay." I could bring up the many cases of people getting prison time for less loss of life or injury like Marissa Alexander or Kalief Browder, but you are all about social contracts so you can probably tell us why they deserved to have their lives ruined but Whitey McRichyRich does not.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 03:52
|
|
|
blarzgh posted:The Law is our social contract. Like, the literal set of rules we agree with each other to abide by. Going to jail as punishment for crimes is actually upholding the social contract, not breaking it. You don't give up citizenship once incarcerated.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 03:54
|
|
|
blarzgh posted:The Law is our social contract. Like, the literal set of rules we agree with each other to abide by.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 03:54
|
|
|
. never thought it would happen to me.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 03:55
|
|
|
blarzgh posted:1. You broke the social contract, so you don't get to help re-write it? Maybe we could let them vote but reduce the effect of their vote by some figure.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 03:58
|
|
|
ozmunkeh posted:Maybe we could let them vote but reduce the effect of their vote by some figure. Lol
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 03:58
|
|
|
FAUXTON posted:Going to jail as punishment for crimes is actually upholding the social contract, not breaking it. You don't give up citizenship once incarcerated. Your name is my second favorite in the thread. I think my characterization is accurate. 'Criminal Justice' is the mechanism of the social contract for those who breach it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 04:02
|
|
|
blarzgh posted:Lol Did you ever manage to find that proof you were talking about before concerning police and non-police being treated exactly the same by the justice system? I'd hate for you to have to leave the thread again before presenting it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 04:02
|
|
|
Does anyone disagree that committing felonies is bad?
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 04:06
|
|
|
If I could make one small change to the constitution, I would make it so a state's representation in congress and therefore also the electoral college is proportional to the number of votes cast in the congressional elections, not on the number of adults in the state regardless of their legal or practical ability to actually vote. In other words, actually uphold the intent of the fifteenth amendment. Then I would be cool with states disenfranchising anyone they want.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 04:06
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:If I could make one small change to the constitution, I would make it so a state's representation in congress and therefore also the electoral college is proportional to the number of votes cast in the congressional elections, not on the number of adults in the state regardless of their legal or practical ability to actually vote. Kinda hard to do with Single Member Districts.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 04:10
|
|
|
blarzgh posted:I think my characterization is accurate. 'Criminal Justice' is the mechanism of the social contract for those who breach it. Nah, it isn't. The social contract pertains more to social participation in broad terms with laws (and the obeyance thereof) being a point on a continuum. That's why Socrates stuck around and drank hemlock rather than being squirreled out of the city by his bros. Please elaborate on where Socrates was wrong in describing the social contract as such.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 04:11
|
|
|
blarzgh posted:Does anyone disagree that committing felonies is bad?
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 04:15
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Kinda hard to do with Single Member Districts. You do it during apportionment like the "Oh sorry you lost so many reps, Mississippi, you've got ten years to bring those numbers up better luck next census!"
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 04:17
|
|
|
blarzgh posted:Lol 3/5 of a vote?
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 04:18
|
|
|
chitoryu12 posted:3/5 of a vote? 
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 04:19
|
|
|
I would also like an explanation of where Rousseau erred in outlining the social contract as submission to governance and a state monopoly on force in exchange for shared ownership through enfranchisement, or at the very least how serving a sentence is not keeping faith with the social contract as described by, well, every philosopher who has ever spoken on the subject directly or indirectly.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 04:21
|
|
|
ozmunkeh posted:Did you ever manage to find that proof you were talking about before concerning police and non-police being treated exactly the same by the justice system? I'd hate for you to have to leave the thread again before presenting it. He tents his pudgy fingers with a practiced undulation; cheeto dust wisping from the tips, like the smoke of the sick burn he was about to unleash. "I've got him now..." *eyes narrow from under fedora* (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 04:24
|
|
|
blarzgh posted:He tents his pudgy fingers with a practiced undulation; cheeto dust wisping from the tips, like the smoke of the sick burn he was about to unleash. So... that's a no. Good talk.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 04:25
|
|
|
FAUXTON posted:I would also like an explanation of where Rousseau erred in outlining the social contract as submission to governance and a state monopoly on force in exchange for shared ownership through enfranchisement, or at the very least how serving a sentence is not keeping faith with the social contract as described by, well, every philosopher who has ever spoken on the subject directly or indirectly. I don't know what any of that means and I don't care. I just disagree with you that a democracy shouldn't be allowed to disenfranchise voters on the basis of a felony conviction.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 04:25
|
|
|
blarzgh posted:I don't know what any of that means and I don't care. I just disagree with you that a democracy shouldn't be allowed to disenfranchise voters on the basis of a felony conviction. Right, I knew all of that to begin with. Why, though? Is it just arbitrary threadshitting disagreement? Or do you have some kind of rationale with which to discuss and/or debate this difference?
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 04:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 16:08 |
|
|
Raerlynn posted:So... that's a no. Good talk. There are always two. One to embody the power, the other to crave it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 04:30
|
|