Also, going to prison is not usually an end-all. There is about exactly what the government's draft bill on prisoner voting will contain on Thursday. Disenfranchisement for ex-felons has helped create a racial divide within voting privileges. If prisoners are unsatisfied with their condition, they should not have got there in the first place, and they have only themselves to blame. Currently when we send someone to prison we strip them of their identity, remove their right to vote and label them as a criminal.
It should be denied to no eligible citizens, including to those who have infringed on the rights of others. When you become a prisoner, you are still human but you are a human that has disobeyed or went against the law. Those who defy the law will be punished, yes, but their human rights should never be taken from them. So if I were a prisoner and given the right to vote. They should still have a say in who rules when they are free. I believe prisoners should have the right to vote because they are humans, Like us and have been downgraded and have had a human right taken away from them. Most of the prisoners have not committed electoral offenses, so why should they be punished differently? Some dissenters might actually view prisoners as something less than human, which is just preposterous.
At the other extreme, there are countries, including the Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, Ireland, Spain, Sweden and Switzerland, that allow serving convicts to vote. If you wanted to be treated like a full citizen, then you shouldn't have committed the things that bring harm to other people. I propose that prisoners and ex-felons should retain the right to vote and that to disempower and disenfranchise such a large portion of the population is philosophically unjustified and harmful to society. Despite this, there are a number of countries where leaders believe that the disenfranchisement of prisoners, merely as a result of their imprisonment, is a justified and prerequisite… 1617 Words 7 Pages Should Prisoners Have Rights? Prisoners have often committed heinous crimes. An interesting and reasonable way to resolve this would be to give voting rights to prisoners with sentences that are due to end over the next four or five years. I would say no, but when their debt is paid it is important to bring them back, and allowing them to vote is essential.
Well, if criminals do not want to have the burden of the laws, then neither should they have the benefit of those laws for the duration of their custodial punishment. Many prisoners are merely people who, for one reason or another, made a bad decision that landed them on the wrong side of the law. Preventing prisoners and ex-felons from voting does not fall within the public safety exception of liberty. There should be no taxation without representation. If we take from a citizen the right to have his or her voice heard without harm to any other, what other infringements can we justify? I completely agree that prisoners need to be educated because when they finally get out, they can be beneficial to society instead of being idle and disorderly.
So, what is the answer to this question? They forfeited their rights to vote by breaking the law. However, unconvicted prisoners being held on remand, along with civil prisoners those jailed for offences such as contempt of court , do still have the right to vote via postal ballots, although very few actually do so. Any unused votes could be used by office guards themselves. They have been excluded from voting… 2530 Words 11 Pages Non-Citizens Should Have the Right to Vote Tayler Gill Ryerson University Joerg Wittenbrinck Non-Citizens should have the right to vote According to Elections Canada 2011 , the right to vote is a major equitable right that is ensured by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Do you still have the right to choose elected officials, or once the law has been broken, has the right to vote been forfeited? There are standards when it comes to voting and who should be allowed to vote.
Some will argue that it is enough to allow prisoners to regain their right to vote after release. Is his driving license confiscated by the state? So what are the issues? Finally, the government of Rwanda is already doing too much for prisoners above and beyond their rights. Why does this European Court get a say? The judgment does not actually mean that prisoners have to have the vote as under the European Convention the right to vote is a very qualified right. Some think that prisoners should not have equal health care rights because once a prisoner has committed a crime they should no longer have the same rights as the average person should. Terry McAuliffe issued a sweeping executive order that changed the lives of 200,000 ex-felons in Virginia, instantly restoring their right to vote.
The European Court of Human Rights has ruled that preventing prisoners from voting essentially denies them their human rights and is therefore against the law. Many will resist the idea of a prison constituency. Someone only a few months away from release in May 2011 will be now out and yet may never get the chance to vote on the electoral system used for the House of Commons. Indeed, government can be held accountable only when citizens have information about the actions of their representatives. You would have done the same for your friends or family too.
Democrats would love to advocate that this is the case but quite simply it is not. Is it not oxymoronic to grant someone who has broken the law a privilege granted by the law? Linking a ban on voting to imprisonment is arbitrary. Not only will we have to pay the costs of the legislation going through both Houses of Parliament and then being sent to draftsmen and then finally to the Queen. Denying prisoners the right to vote marginalizes whole segments of the population that are over-represented in our prison cells. In the case of referenda, which tend to come around very infrequently, those results could affect the prisoner for the rest of their life. The views and needs of prisoners are currently not represented.
Denying them the right to vote is likely to undermine the respect for the rule of law. State laws governing voter eligibility for prisoners and ex-felons vary greatly. It would be much easier to not change the laws and not allow them to vote. They argue that efforts to block ex-felons from voting are unfair, undemocratic, and politically or racially motivated. Voting encourages prisoners to take an interest in current affairs, which will aid their reintegration into society. We are continually improving the quality of our text archives. I asked a prisoner in his 30s who is serving a long sentence about his voting record.
There is a multiplicity of voices and opinions when it comes to this particular question. Voting is a privilege, not a right, and people in prison has shown they are not worthy of that privilege by breaking the law in the first place. The denial of this right to any citizen, prisoners included, can lead to dangerous slippery slope consequences. Voting is a right and a privilege for people who wish to participate in democratic society. Currently no prisoners are allowed to vote, except those on remand - that's those being held while they wait for the case against them to be finished. . Prisoners should be granted privileges depending on the type of crime they committed.