56
submitted 1 year ago by MrPhibb@reddthat.com to c/usa@lemmy.ml

I'm not entirely against disenfranchising felons, however if'n you're going to do that, you shouldn't be counting them as part of the voting age population.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Mobiuthuselah@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

If I understand the first part correctly, you don't think they should have the right to vote (the right to representation) if they haven't fully repaid their debt to society? Why not?

Edit: What I'm getting at is why even strip the right to vote to begin with? What purpose does that serve?

[-] MrPhibb@reddthat.com 2 points 1 year ago

I just think it's fair that they pay for their crime, although I would have no problems considering payment plans as paid from day one,. Where things get complicated in Florida, is that even if you pay for your crime, you don't get your right to vote back if'n you owe anything to the state, even if it's unrelated. Oh, and it's your problem to find it. Did I mention that it's a crime to claim you've settled everything if'n you have, even if you don't know about the debt? Yeah, now that's a lot of BS Throw in the fact that prisoners count in the census despite not being able to vote while incarcerated, and often not after. If they count they should be allowed to vote.

[-] Mobiuthuselah@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago

The FL situation sounds messed up, absolutely.

I think we can mostly all agree on "paying" the debt to society. I put that in quotes because I don't think we're taking about fines which make it the cost of doing business for those in an upper income level. I think we both agree we're talking about punishments for serious crimes.

With voting, I don't think it should be taken away at all from citizens. We should have a say in our representation even if we have violated a law. I can't think of any reason to take away voting rights as payment for a crime, can you? It's been used to control and disenfranchise minority populations since it's implementation. It continues to encourage systemic racism

[-] keepcarrot@hexbear.net 2 points 1 year ago

Clearly it would skew the electorate to the hitherto disenfranchised pro-murder caucus /s

[-] ShimmeringKoi@hexbear.net 0 points 1 year ago

Historically, it's served the purpose of stripping political power from overpoliced communities to ensure that those most at the mercy of the carceral industry are given the least power to legally change anything about it.

this post was submitted on 21 Sep 2023
56 points (98.3% liked)

United States | News & Politics

7210 readers
261 users here now

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS