Printable View
Quote:
Originally Posted by Red
ehh because they live here lol. Just because they did wrong and have to spend time away from people they love in a cell and if they drop soap they could be hurt :) doesnt mean they should lose their vote. A vote can change the way of the country and since it's part of the system. Everyone SHOULD BE entitled to their own say no matter what they done. tbh this whole thread is stupid and pointless
So your telling me you would be happy with the likes of Colin Duffy or someone being elected into government? lol At the most I would accept only giving the vote to those who have committed minor crimes but I don't really think murderers/rapists should be allowed any say in the way the country is run.
And now you just admitted something which you did not in the other thread which is simply that Punishment is actually just rewording of rehabilitation which you denied even existed in prison.Quote:
Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-
In which case removing the right to vote certainly does provide a means to rehabilitate them so they do not re-offend however I do not believe that quite justifies removing that very important right to decide who is responsible for your life - even in prison.
lmao i mean to vote not to be voted for. . . WAIT WHAT IS THE POINT IN THIS THREAD??? IS IT TO BE VOTED FOR OR TO BE ABLE TO VOTE JUSTQuote:
Originally Posted by Red
It's not an important right, if it was they would already have it and desire it so much it would be inhuman for them not to have it. But as it's just some legal right plastered into the fabric of the Human Rights Act 1998, it isn't a basic human right. It's interesting it's mentioned in the Act of Parliament, but is never acted upon. That said, their care will always be looked after no matter who is in office. If they are punished, tortured or harmed in prison then their actual human rights will be breached, therefore the law would be broken and the Government would be committing a criminal act.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chippiewill
Saying they need the right to vote without evidence as to why is just as bad as saying they should not be allowed without explanation.
The right to vote :P I'm not sure on the specifics, but I think people who have been in prison can be voted into office. If they manage to get votes then there must be some public confidence so a law would seem unnecessary.Quote:
Originally Posted by Andii
Clearly Women should never have been given the right to vote and people who are black should be slaves because if they should have proper rights then they'd already have them.Quote:
Originally Posted by GommeInc
The joys of social change :P Though you could argue that women and minorities could probably of not been given such rights, which is what you're suggesting with what I said, your argument falls flat when there is a huge difference between prisoners and discrimination. Women prior to attempting to vote are innocent and honest people in the eyes of the law, they have not broken the law until they have tried to vote. However, prisoners are completely different - they are in prison for committing a guilty offense (and having a guilty mind) hence their imprisonment, so they should not be given the right to vote because they do not look at society with the eyes of honest, reasonable people - otherwise they would of been found guilty of whatever crime they had committed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chippiewill
The "right to vote" isn't a human right in the same way as liberty, expression, religion/belief or any other important right, considering more important rights like freedom to express yourself and liberty are taken away when you are in prison.
That isn't rehabilitation - rehabilitation is the aim to change somebody (which has proven to be impossible) whereas punishment is the aim to scare somebody enough in order to prevent them from doing something bad again - with punishment they haven't changed but they do not act upon their desires/thoughts because they fear the consquences if they do. For example, a naughty child is taught not to punch other children when another child finally turns around and smacks him back - because the child then knows that if he does so again he will be hurt and humiliated. Rehabilitation on the other hand would be the teacher trying to change the actions of the child through talking with him.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chippiewill
Another example would be when regimes crack down on uprisings. When the regime forces everybody (through fear) back into their homes, they still think the same thoughts of the regime - but they don't act upon those thoughts out of fear. Now, would you claim those people are 'rehabilitated'? of course not because they are still the same.
Punishment works, rehabilitation doesn't.
Interesting point that no-one seems to have picked up on - say that prisoners can vote if they can get to the polling stations. Since most prisoners have no freedom of movement this would cut a lot of them out of the voting while allowing lesser criminals (those in open prisons) to retain some sense of society, as is the point of open prisons anyway. It would also satisfy the EU's daft demand that voting be seen as a human right when it's clearly anything but.Quote:
Originally Posted by Logandyer45
While I'm somewhat divided myself on the idea of prisoners voting, this isn't a valid point since criminals have actually done something to bring punishment (or rehabilitation as you put it) upon themselves rather than simply being born a certain way.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chippiewill
Pretty sure that is entirely false unless you somehow don't believe in social conditioning and think we're all just *+*FoLLoWiiNG ouR DeSTiiNy*+*Quote:
Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-
Those are basically the same thing. Punishment just rehabilitates the people who didn't understand the consequences of their actions.Quote:
Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-