User Tag List

First 1234 Last

Results 11 to 20 of 57

  1. #11
    Senior Member lowtech redneck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    3,705

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PinkPiranha View Post
    On the news today. I don't see why not (barring psychotics).
    I agree in principle, but I think the resumption of the right to vote should correspond with resumption of the right to bear arms. Both are constitutional rights that are taken away as a consequence of violating the laws of the land-and if someone is convicted of something that makes people think he should no longer have the right to own a gun, then he shouldn't have the right to vote either. Also, parole counts as a continuation of a prison sentence, the restrictions on physical liberty are simply relaxed for "good behaivor."

  2. #12
    veteran attention whore Jeffster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    ESFP
    Enneagram
    7w6 sx
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    6,727

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Spartacuss View Post
    Yeah, the GOP likes its felons unconvicted and preferably in office.
    Hey, if you're not cheating, you're not trying. And it's only cheating if you get caught.
    Jeffster Illustrates the Artisan Temperament <---- click here

    "I like the sigs with quotes in them from other forum members." -- Oberon

    The SP Spazz Youtube Channel

  3. #13
    wholly charmed Spartacuss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Posts
    677

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lowtech redneck View Post
    I agree in principle, but I think the resumption of the right to vote should correspond with resumption of the right to bear arms.
    Why should the two be tied? Are the rationales for each deprivation the same?
    Quote Originally Posted by lowtech redneck View Post
    Both are constitutional rights that are taken away as a consequence of violating the laws of the land-and if someone is convicted of something that makes people think he should no longer have the right to own a gun, then he shouldn't have the right to vote either. Also, parole counts as a continuation of a prison sentence, the restrictions on physical liberty are simply relaxed for "good behaivor."
    A convicted felon is deprived of the freedom to leave the prison when he starts serving time, yet this deprivation ceases when his term is up or is relaxed as you put it when he is released. What is it about bearing arms that makes it a better or even a relevant standard by which to judge fitness for having the right to vote?
    Ti (43); Ne (41.8); Te (33.7); Fi (30.5); Ni (27.5); Se (24.7); Si (21.5); Fe (17.3)
    The More You Know the Less You Need. - Aboriginal Saying

  4. #14
    Senior Member lowtech redneck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    3,705

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeffster View Post
    Hey, if you're not cheating, you're not trying. And it's only cheating if you get caught.
    I take it you're a John McGraw fan?

  5. #15
    Senior Member lowtech redneck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    3,705

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Spartacuss View Post
    Why should the two be tied? Are the rationales for each deprivation the same?

    A convicted felon is deprived of the freedom to leave the prison when he starts serving time, yet this deprivation ceases when his term is up or is relaxed as you put it when he is released. What is it about bearing arms that makes it a better or even a relevant standard by which to judge fitness for having the right to vote?
    They are both constitutional rights that people are prevented from exercising by the state as punishment for violating laws that are (often subjectively) viewed as more important than other laws. The rationale for the deprivation of constitutional rights for convicted felons is based on the idea that they have willfully abrogated their rights by breaking those laws. There is no hierarchy of constitutional rights in the legal sense, so equal standards must apply.

  6. #16
    wholly charmed Spartacuss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Posts
    677

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lowtech redneck View Post
    The rationale for the deprivation of constitutional rights for convicted felons is based on the idea that they have willfully abrogated their rights by breaking those laws.
    But equal standards don't apply flatly like that, since some deprivations are temporary.
    Ti (43); Ne (41.8); Te (33.7); Fi (30.5); Ni (27.5); Se (24.7); Si (21.5); Fe (17.3)
    The More You Know the Less You Need. - Aboriginal Saying

  7. #17
    Senior Member lowtech redneck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    3,705

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Spartacuss View Post
    But equal standards don't apply flatly like that, since some deprivations are temporary.
    Its the consitutional rights that must be considered equal, not the laws which are violated.

    Edit: I think I might have misunderstood what you were saying. Could you be more specific?
    Last edited by lowtech redneck; 09-14-2008 at 02:36 PM. Reason: see edit

  8. #18
    wholly charmed Spartacuss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Posts
    677

    Default

    I thought so.
    Restating this...
    A convicted felon is deprived of the freedom to leave the prison when he starts serving time, yet this deprivation ceases when his term is up or is relaxed as you put it when he is released. What is it about bearing arms that makes it a better or even a relevant standard by which to judge fitness for having the right to vote?
    If, a convict in prison loses, among other things, the right to bear arms, the right to free movement, and the right to vote, yet, having served his time regains the right to free movement (liberty), etc. what is the basis for continuing to deprive him of a vote? One deprivation is lifted, so what makes voting one of those deprivations that "should" not be lifted?
    Ti (43); Ne (41.8); Te (33.7); Fi (30.5); Ni (27.5); Se (24.7); Si (21.5); Fe (17.3)
    The More You Know the Less You Need. - Aboriginal Saying

  9. #19
    The Black Knight Domino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    eNFJ
    Enneagram
    4w3 sx/so
    Socionics
    eNFJ Ni
    Posts
    11,443

    Default

    Are not some felonious acts - the most heinous imaginable - so horrible that the felon is rightly no longer considered a full citizen? Not all who violate and destroy remain in prison. That much is certain.
    eNFJ 4w3 sx/so 468 tritype
    Neutral Good
    EII-Fi subtype, Ethical/Empath, Delta/Beta
    RLUEI, Choleric/Melancholic
    Inquistive/Limbic
    AIS Holland code
    Researcher: VDI-P
    Dramatic>Sensitive>Serious

  10. #20
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    MBTI
    type
    Posts
    9,100

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PinkPiranha View Post
    Are not some felonious acts - the most heinous imaginable - so horrible that the felon is rightly no longer considered a full citizen? Not all who violate and destroy remain in prison. That much is certain.
    Law is sketchy. When you impose one law which affects a variety of people, it's my opinion the entire group should be given the benefit of the doubt, as opposed to "harsh treatment across the board." Further, I think that if ex-cons are allowed to be considered normal (as long as they're deemed fit to leave prison), they're more likely to be normal.

    If we had an omniscent arbiter to judge every man in every case, we wouldn't need Law at all.

Similar Threads

  1. Children Should Not Be Allowed To Have Best Friends
    By Mal12345 in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: 05-17-2015, 11:36 AM
  2. Should women be allowed to be topless in public?
    By Lady_X in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 245
    Last Post: 07-20-2014, 09:09 PM
  3. Should discriminatory groups be allowed to exist?
    By Such Irony in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 03-18-2012, 03:43 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO