Crime: Should Convicted Felons be able to Vote?

[Michael1928]

What is Congressman Paul's view on this issue, and also, what is yours? Please clarify which opinion is yours/his.

 

[Keith and stuff]

Under the current system, I think anyone not in jail should be allowed to vote. If someone did their time and was released, they should be given a 2nd chance. Many felons hardly did anything wrong, anyway. For example, selling someone marijuana for $20 can result in a felon in Florida.

I am glad that felons are allowed to vote where I live. If the law wasn't that way, I'd work to improve the law so that felons could vote.

 

[Edward]

I imagine that Paul would say it is up to the individual States to decide on whether felons can vote. My own view is that if someone has paid for their crime, they should be allowed to vote.

 

[kylejack]

In jail is debatable. Released from jail, absolutely yes, they should be able to vote. The fact that we've criminalized so much bullshit means we have a lot of good people that went to jail for no good reason. Besides, even the real bad guys need to be normalized back into society once they've served their time.

 

[erowe1]

Nobody should be allowed to vote. And that includes felons.

 

[brandon]

Yes, after you serve your time, including any parole, you should have all the same rights as everyone else.

 

[phill4paul]

I've never understood why felons should be stripped of voting rights. Unless, it was to insure that individuals that do not believe in living 'under-thumb' should ever have a voice in reversing being so. In today's America I can see how that might be politically wise to those in power.

 

[AFPVet]

Once you have served your time and all of your parole or probation, you should have all of your rights restored. Remember, criminals will disregard the law... only law abiding citizens will respect laws. Since I have worked and studied in the criminal justice system, I understand recidivism... and that our crime and punishment system needs to be revised. Furthermore, we need to deactivate the war on drugs and get rid of foolish laws/regulations.

 

[eduardo89]

I imagine that Paul would say it is up to the individual States to decide on whether felons can vote. My own view is that if someone has paid for their crime, they should be allowed to vote.

Constitution leaves voting qualifications entirely up to the state. Amendments have, however, barred states from discriminating voter eligibility based on gender, race, previous condition of servitude, or age (provided the person is over 18).

 

[JK/SEA]

sure, let them vote, just don't count them.......wait......

 

[r3volution]

as long as there felony was not for voter fraud yes .

the same goes for gun possession , as long as the crime was not a gun crime or a violent crime they should not lose there 2nd amendment right either .

felonies are far too easy to get these days but that is another subject .

 

[specsaregood]

Unless, it was to insure that individuals that do not believe in living 'under-thumb' should ever have a voice in reversing being so.

Is there any doubt that is what it is for? I think those in jail and parole should be able to vote too.

 

[Professor8000]

as long as there felony was not for voter fraud yes .

the same goes for gun possession , as long as the crime was not a gun crime or a violent crime they should not lose there 2nd amendment right either .

felonies are far too easy to get these days but that is another subject .

I would happen to disagree with you on the part about the second amendment. If someone is trusted to be released back into the public after they have committed a serious crime, then all of their rights should be restored to them. If they are trusted enough to be released from captivity and to function responsibly within society, then there is no reason to deny them their rights any longer.

If they can't be trusted to function responsibly within society, they why should they be released from captivity? If they can't be trusted to not violate the rights of others after their release, they why should they be released?

 

[rpwi]

IMO all citizens should be able to vote regardless of their convictions from the state (even in jail). If government can marginalize your participation in democracy, then do we have a democracy? Should government be able to pass a frivolous law that declares 99% of the populace to be felons and that only an elite 1% get to control government?

What about our drug laws? We have at least 6 million convicted felons in the US...many of which are for drugs. Many of us feel this is an unjust situation...so why shouldn't they vote? What about copyright laws. Many, many users of the internet violate copyright laws and could be convicted as felons. Wouldn't surprise me if the number of illegal downloaders was greater than the number of voters in the 2008 election.

Penalties should be fine and jail time. Not removing the right to vote.

 

[presence]

Many felons hardly did anything wrong, anyway. For example, selling someone marijuana for $20 can result in a felon in Florida.

I'm with you... that's the problem with the word "felon" ...there can now be felonies for statutory offenses where there is NO CRIME, no one hurt, no property damaged, nothing stolen... just "statutory" possession... followed by "statutory" parole violations... resulting in bs felony charges. Or you can become a felon after the cops beat you up and charge you with assaulting an officer.

the system is screwed.

There was an article today about a guy (Dennis White) that has a custom liscence plate that reads "NO TAGS" ...legal and proper... he's still facing $20,000 in bogus tickets. I'm surprised he's not a felon yet.

presence

 

[r3volution]

I would happen to disagree with you on the part about the second amendment. If someone is trusted to be released back into the public after they have committed a serious crime, then all of their rights should be restored to them. If they are trusted enough to be released from captivity and to function responsibly within society, then there is no reason to deny them their rights any longer.

If they can't be trusted to function responsibly within society, they why should they be released from captivity? If they can't be trusted to not violate the rights of others after their release, they why should they be released?

i use to share the same opinion as you , and in a black and white world that would work just fine . however the way that system would have to work is life sentences or no sentences with nothing in between .

you mention "release" as if all felons spend time in jail which is not true , and brings me back to what i said earlier about it being too easy to be convicted of a felony . felonies should be restricted to only the most hanis crimes such as murder and rape . if that was the case then the whole gun issue would hold more weight , as im sure it did back when it was initially implemented .

however you can be convicted of a felony for simply downloading a copywritten song on the internet today , and that does not justify the loss of gun rights imo .

 

[Professor8000]

i use to share the same opinion as you , and in a black and white world that would work just fine . however the way that system would have to work is life sentences or no sentences with nothing in between .

you mention "release" as if all felons spend time in jail which is not true , and brings me back to what i said earlier about it being too easy to be convicted of a felony . felonies should be restricted to only the most hanis crimes such as murder and rape . if that was the case then the whole gun issue would hold more weight , as im sure it did back when it was initially implemented .

however you can be convicted of a felony for simply downloading a copywritten song on the internet today , and that does not justify the loss of gun rights imo .

I think that if you have done anything to warrant being placed into prison, you shouldn't be released unless you are ready to integrate back into society. I also think that to violate someone's rights is an act of forfeiture of your own rights. If you have violated no one's rights, then no one has the right to use force against you. But if everyone thought the same way, our prisons would be nearly empty.

 

[Lindsey]

I imagine that Paul would say it is up to the individual States to decide on whether felons can vote. My own view is that if someone has paid for their crime, they should be allowed to vote.

This.

 

[tom7126]

i support a voting license that requires you to pass a rigorous political test.