What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Should Felons have votes? (1 Viewer)

Should they? Regardless of violent or not

  • Yes

    Votes: 29 35.4%

  • No

    Votes: 34 41.5%

  • Maybe

    Votes: 19 23.2%
  • Total voters
    82
[scooter] said:
Depending on how it's calculated, Tennessee has between 320,000 and 421,227 convicted felons who are prohibited from voting.

There are thousands of additional felons in Tennessee who are eligible to vote, either because they received a pardon or because they were convicted during an 8-year window (1973-81) when the current disenfranchisement law did not apply.
Click to expand...
In Florida it's about 1.5 million former felons who can't vote. DiSantis and the GOP are slow walking and trying to create barriers in implementing Amendment 4 which would restore their voting rights. Many felons just possessed a couple of reefers decades ago.

 
Henry Ford said:
I don't understand what you mean by "criminal justice purpose" if you don't allow for "protecting society as a whole from someone with demonstrably bad judgment specifically with respect to the health and welfare of society."  I guess it's punitive, but that's not the primary purpose in my opinion.

Can you explain what you mean by "criminal justice purpose"?
Click to expand...
Well, I guess I was referring to the classic stated purposes for criminal punishment like specific deterrence, general deterrence, retribution, rehabilitation, etc.  It doesn’t seem like disenfranchisement fits very easily into any of those categories.  

What you’re describing sounds more like “they shouldn’t vote because we don’t like how they would vote.”  And that to me is problematic, because it sounds just like every other form of voter suppression.

 
fatguyinalittlecoat said:
Well, I guess I was referring to the classic stated purposes for criminal punishment like specific deterrence, general deterrence, retribution, rehabilitation, etc.  It doesn’t seem like disenfranchisement fits very easily into any of those categories.  

What you’re describing sounds more like “they shouldn’t vote because we don’t like how they would vote.”  And that to me is problematic, because it sounds just like every other form of voter suppression.
Click to expand...
"They shouldn't be able to decide what to do all day because we don't like what they will do all day" - prison

"They shouldn't be able to be around a school because we don't like what they do with children" - sex offender rules

"They shouldn't be able to drink because we don't like what they do when they drink" - ingestion restrictions on probation

"They shouldn't be allowed to be around felons because we don't like how they act in groups of felons" - association restrictions

"They shouldn't be allowed to have guns because we don't like what they might do given their violent histories, even if it didn't involve a gun" - firearm restrictions for felons

Yeah, generally we stop people from doing things because we don't like how they would or might do it.  And I understand you don't think that should apply to voting, I personally think it can apply to virtually anything while serving a sentence and shouldn't apply to as much after serving a sentence, with some exceptions.

 
Henry Ford said:
"They shouldn't be able to decide what to do all day because we don't like what they will do all day" - prison

"They shouldn't be able to be around a school because we don't like what they do with children" - sex offender rules

"They shouldn't be able to drink because we don't like what they do when they drink" - ingestion restrictions on probation

"They shouldn't be allowed to be around felons because we don't like how they act in groups of felons" - association restrictions

"They shouldn't be allowed to have guns because we don't like what they might do given their violent histories, even if it didn't involve a gun" - firearm restrictions for felons

Yeah, generally we stop people from doing things because we don't like how they would or might do it.  And I understand you don't think that should apply to voting, I personally think it can apply to virtually anything while serving a sentence and shouldn't apply to as much after serving a sentence, with some exceptions.
Click to expand...
Yeah those examples seem pretty dissimilar to me.  We don’t let sex offenders near schools because we don’t want them molesting kids.  We don’t let certain people on probation drink because we’re afraid they could become violent or drive drunk or something.  Those are issues of public safety or other compelling government interests.

By contrast, we don’t let incarcerated felons vote because they might vote for candidates we disagree with.  Casting a vote isn’t a violent act, it’s pretty much the opposite of a violent act.  If felons feel like they’ve been wronged by society in some way I’d rather them try to rectify that at the ballot box than by doing something dangerous.

 
fatguyinalittlecoat said:
Yeah those examples seem pretty dissimilar to me.  We don’t let sex offenders near schools because we don’t want them molesting kids.  We don’t let certain people on probation drink because we’re afraid they could become violent or drive drunk or something.  Those are issues of public safety or other compelling government interests.

By contrast, we don’t let incarcerated felons vote because they might vote for candidates we disagree with.  Casting a vote isn’t a violent act, it’s pretty much the opposite of a violent act.  If felons feel like they’ve been wronged by society in some way I’d rather them try to rectify that at the ballot box than by doing something dangerous.
Click to expand...
Going to the corner store to purchase a pack of cigarettes isn't a violent act, either, but we don't let people who are incarcerated do that.  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The USA is an outlier among democracies when it comes to both incarceration rate and voter disenfranchisement for criminals. The roots of both are in racism. 

 
Yeah.  No question.  No one is more knowledgeable about our broken injustice system, or more inclined to fix it than the incarcerated.  It’s a major problem that continues to be ignored because Americans don’t have to bother thinking about it.   These people simply don’t exist.  

The reaction here says it all.

 
SoBeDad said:
The USA is an outlier among democracies when it comes to both incarceration rate and voter disenfranchisement for criminals. The roots of both are in racism. 
Click to expand...
Incarceration rate, certainly, and disenfranchisement for released prisoners.  Voting restrictions while in prison we’re not that much of an outlier. 

https://felonvoting.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=000289

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Max Power said:
Can we at least show libs eating libs on how libs they can lib?
Click to expand...
This is a relatively interesting comment to the current state of politics in this country and how the "sides" differ.  It's a rather good illustration of the old "Democrats fall in love, Republicans fall in line" narrative.  It's absolutely stunning that simply having a differing opinion within a group that agrees on 90ish percent of things is "eating their own".  There seems to be so little room for differing opinion on the right that when they see two people having different opinions they immediately jump to "eating their own".  The condition is apparently real.

 
Put me in the camp that says while in prison no, but once they have completed their sentence yes 

 
Sanders slams Florida bill requiring felons to pay court fees before voting as 'racist and unconstitutional. 

"Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) denounced the passage of a bill in the Florida House that would require felons to pay court fees before becoming eligible to vote, calling it a “racist and unconstitutional” effort "to deny people the right to vote...The Florida bill would limit a state constitutional amendment that passed in 2018 that restored voting rights to about 1.5 million felons who have been released from prison."

The court fees are not assessed by the judge as part of the sentence. In Florida , they're assigned by the court clerks to fund court operations. It's estimated that 80% of felons who have complete the terms of their sentence including probation and restitution, would not be able to pay court fees and fines.  https://www.thedailybeast.com/what-referendum-florida-gop-set-to-exclude-up-to-80-of-felons-from-voting

This could play a role in determining our next president.

 
SoBeDad said:
Sanders slams Florida bill requiring felons to pay court fees before voting as 'racist and unconstitutional. 

"Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) denounced the passage of a bill in the Florida House that would require felons to pay court fees before becoming eligible to vote, calling it a “racist and unconstitutional” effort "to deny people the right to vote...The Florida bill would limit a state constitutional amendment that passed in 2018 that restored voting rights to about 1.5 million felons who have been released from prison."

The court fees are not assessed by the judge as part of the sentence. In Florida , they're assigned by the court clerks to fund court operations. It's estimated that 80% of felons who have complete the terms of their sentence including probation and restitution, would not be able to pay court fees and fines.  https://www.thedailybeast.com/what-referendum-florida-gop-set-to-exclude-up-to-80-of-felons-from-voting

This could play a role in determining our next president.
Click to expand...
Just seems to be another attempt to sidestep the will of the people.  Pay the fines levied as part of the sentence before you can vote and serve all your time?  Sure...no problem.  The rest is garbage and just a big F-you by the politicians to the electorate.  

 
SoBeDad said:
Sanders slams Florida bill requiring felons to pay court fees before voting as 'racist and unconstitutional. 

"Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) denounced the passage of a bill in the Florida House that would require felons to pay court fees before becoming eligible to vote, calling it a “racist and unconstitutional” effort "to deny people the right to vote...The Florida bill would limit a state constitutional amendment that passed in 2018 that restored voting rights to about 1.5 million felons who have been released from prison."

The court fees are not assessed by the judge as part of the sentence. In Florida , they're assigned by the court clerks to fund court operations. It's estimated that 80% of felons who have complete the terms of their sentence including probation and restitution, would not be able to pay court fees and fines.  https://www.thedailybeast.com/what-referendum-florida-gop-set-to-exclude-up-to-80-of-felons-from-voting

This could play a role in determining our next president.
Click to expand...
I think paying your fines is part of the restitution process and should happen prior to giving back voting rights. I don’t know how that works with the vote in Florida though.

Paying your debt to society includes actually paying your debts to society.

 
jonessed said:
I think paying your fines is part of the restitution process and should happen prior to giving back voting rights. I don’t know how that works with the vote in Florida though.

Paying your debt to society includes actually paying your debts to society.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure our personal preferences about the "restitution process" are relevant to the story here.  Florida voters passed a referendum calling for restoration of "voting rights of Floridians with felony convictions after they complete all terms of their sentence including parole or probation." The only question is whether the fines and fees are "terms of their sentence" as the Florida voters understood it. I don't think any reasonable reading of that language would include administrative fees levied by court clerks as "terms of a sentence." Sentences are handed down by judges.

 
TobiasFunke said:
I'm not sure our personal preferences about the "restitution process" are relevant to the story here.  Florida voters passed a referendum calling for restoration of "voting rights of Floridians with felony convictions after they complete all terms of their sentence including parole or probation." The only question is whether the fines and fees are "terms of their sentence" as the Florida voters understood it. I don't think any reasonable reading of that language would include administrative fees levied by court clerks as "terms of a sentence." Sentences are handed down by judges.
Click to expand...
I consider paying the fees a part of making restitution.  They owe the communities the money to cover the costs they incurred as a part of their illegal activity.

As to how that impacts the Florida law, I’ll let the Florida courts sort that out.

 
jonessed said:
I consider paying the fees a part of making restitution.  They owe the communities the money to cover the costs they incurred as a part of their illegal activity.

As to how that impacts the Florida law, I’ll let the Florida courts sort that out.
Click to expand...
I consider paying the fees a charitable donation to help buy Rick Scott a handsome toupee.

Our perspectives are equally relevant to the question of whether the Florida legislature is subverting the will of the voters here, given that the ballot measure did not use the word "restitution."

 
TobiasFunke said:
I consider paying the fees a charitable donation to help buy Rick Scott a handsome toupee.

Our perspectives are equally relevant to the question of whether the Florida legislature is subverting the will of the voters here, given that the ballot measure did not use the word "restitution."
Click to expand...
I agree.  I was focused on the topic question.  I really don’t want to get into the Florida-specific issues.  I’m not that knowledgeable on the details and I don’t really have any desire to be.

 
jonessed said:
I think paying your fines is part of the restitution process and should happen prior to giving back voting rights. I don’t know how that works with the vote in Florida though.

Paying your debt to society includes actually paying your debts to society.
Click to expand...
What Florida Republicans are trying to do is include post-sentence civil judgments and "court user fees" as part of the restitution process.

If you believe that it's OK to require these tacked-on fees to be paid off before voting, that's your prerogative. But I don't think that is what the people were voting for. It will be up to the courts to decide if the letter of the law is being followed or not.

 
[scooter] said:
What Florida Republicans are trying to do is include post-sentence civil judgments and "court user fees" as part of the restitution process.

If you believe that it's OK to require these tacked-on fees to be paid off before voting, that's your prerogative. But I don't think that is what the people were voting for. It will be up to the courts to decide if the letter of the law is being followed or not.
Click to expand...
Any sane court should shoot this down.  We shall see if a court in Florida does.

 
[scooter] said:
What Florida Republicans are trying to do is include post-sentence civil judgments and "court user fees" as part of the restitution process.

If you believe that it's OK to require these tacked-on fees to be paid off before voting, that's your prerogative. But I don't think that is what the people were voting for. It will be up to the courts to decide if the letter of the law is being followed or not.
Click to expand...
I think they should be.  These are fees associated with the costs of their actions.

As to the legal specifics of the Florida issues.  I’m aware of the general problem.  I just don’t want to get into the details.  I’ll let Florida sort that out.  I don’t have an opinion on it.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
jonessed said:
I think paying your fines is part of the restitution process and should happen prior to giving back voting rights. I don’t know how that works with the vote in Florida though.

Paying your debt to society includes actually paying your debts to society.
Click to expand...
The ballot measure made no mention of any "fines" or "court costs" outside the scope of the sentencing.

A "yes" vote supported this amendment to automatically restore the right to vote for people with prior felony convictions, except those convicted of murder or a felony sexual offense, upon completion of their sentences, including prison, parole, and probation.
Click to expand...
So, as I said before, if part of your sentence handed down by the judge is a financial payment of some sort, fine.  The rest is garbage.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Amused to Death said:
So what you're saying is by keeping them from voting, it helps the party you favor.
Click to expand...
Not at all.  It’s a common mindset from common folk that murderers, thieves, child molesters, terrorists, drug kingpins, rapists, etc. lost their right to vote when they committed their crimes.  

When you can’t win on the message you apparently just need to find ways to increase your base of malleable minds.  

 
Or you can say once the debt to society has been paid, you regain your rights. By denying that, you're effectively suppressing the right to vote.

Can you explain "malleable minds"?

 
What’s the legal basis for voting rights withheld?  This is one of those side topics that surfaces a bit every big election, but I’m largely ignorant to the ins and outs aside from knowing that some states don’t allow felons to vote.  Voting obviously isn’t an all or nothing right, as evidenced by this topic existing.  Initial reaction would be “why would this be revoked after serving the remedy prescribed them according to law (their sentencing) to atone for whatever societal ill perpetrated?”  Even if violent, they can roam free after jail/prison, but stay away from the voting booth?

 
That one guy said:
What’s the legal basis for voting rights withheld?  This is one of those side topics that surfaces a bit every big election, but I’m largely ignorant to the ins and outs aside from knowing that some states don’t allow felons to vote.  Voting obviously isn’t an all or nothing right, as evidenced by this topic existing.  Initial reaction would be “why would this be revoked after serving the remedy prescribed them according to law (their sentencing) to atone for whatever societal ill perpetrated?”  Even if violent, they can roam free after jail/prison, but stay away from the voting booth?
Click to expand...
This is what I'd like @knowledge dropper to address. Felons who have been released from prison have most of their freedoms. I don't see the downside of restoring their right to vote. Well, other than keeping the Dems from voting.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Captain Cranks
The Rise of Christian Nationalism
2
Replies
56
Views
1K
Manster
Manster
Gopher State
  • Poll
Joe Biden as a war president
2 3 4
Replies
175
Views
4K
The General
The General
belljr
Governor Abbott questions
Replies
8
Views
378
Osaurus
Osaurus

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top