Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: mg1942 on October 04, 2008, 10:31:37 PM
-
:uhoh
Push to register felons to vote could aid Obama
Activists: Disproportionate black population of ex-felons may shift outcome
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27023034/
-
try not to cheer too loudly.
-
try not to cheer too loudly.
who says I'm cheering~
-
Man, they are REALLY pulling out all the stops.
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1aBaX9GPSaQ
-
The next logical step... let the "rest of the world" vote who our president is.
After all, they all have opinions. The "chosen person" CAN and/or WILL affect their lives (by increasing or cutting handouts to them or just straight bombing them).
By all means.
P.S. Especially the French and Russians.
-
In my old country, this kind of stunt is NOT allowed! NO PRISONERS allowed! You do your time! When you're finished that's the time you can vote again.
This is the first time that I'm outraged!
I'm always relaxed with my posts...
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1aBaX9GPSaQ
"Maybe in Ohio, but not America!!"
ROF!!
-
I thought felons weren't allowed to vote? Am I wrong in this?
-
Holy crap!
They're still making the Simpsons? I thought that died like 6 years ago.
-
with every presidential election since carter the democrats have looked for some new class of people to givethe vote to in an attempt to sway the outcome.
i am an ex-felon twice over so i come to this discussion with the prior experience of having met thousands of ex-felons.
first, your NEVER an "ex"-felon, you either have just not been caught lately or have found something to do to keep you busy enough that you dint have time to get into trouble (thank you aces high!) but that is subject to change at any given moment or mood swing.
second most felons have a 6th grade or lower education and mentality. childish and selfish tends to be a way of life.
third the majority of felons believe that the rights of others are meaningless and that the violations of the trivial rights of others (say being safe in your own home, going to work or school without fear of bodily harm, or to own and derive personal pleasure and benefit from personal money and property) should not be held against them. obviously it must be your fault that you allowed yourself to be a victim.
really think about it, are these really the kinds of people who you feel have retained the right to make decision that may affect the lives and wellbeing of your children? (aside from the fact that Alot of those "ex"-felons are child molesters, and all of them believe they are victims of their upbringing and not really criminals. thus they and their families push to decriminalize child molestation and to classify it as a illness like alcoholism or drug addiction. believing that instead of being punished it should be treated) go look in the eyes of your child, take a long deep look inside them, then ask yourself if you would trust their life in the affectionate care of the neighborhood pedophile.
sorry if I'm a little abrasive about this type of topic, but the safety and long term wellbeing of my family lays in the hands of the dumb tulips that think this trash up.
anyways just my quick thoughts on the subject
FLOTSOM
-
I thought felons weren't allowed to vote? Am I wrong in this?
The law is not consistent from state to state. In some states if they are a felon they lose it forever. In others they get the right back only if their civil rights have been restored (same for owning a gun). In other states they get the right back after serving time and fewer states allow felons to vote as long as they are felons of non-violent crimes and first time offenders and have served their time.
A.C.O.R.N. is one organization that pushes the limits by actually going to the prisons and waiting outside for prison releases so they can sign them up right then and there.
Felons vote Democrat by a very very very wide margin giving credit to the 6th grade education/mentality comment.
The bill introduced by Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barbara Boxer and Rep. Stephanie Tubbs-Jones of Ohio considered to be tremendously Unconstitutional:
"The Count Every Vote Act, which might better be called the What's a Little Fraud Among Friends? Act, reflects monomania—the idea that anything that increases the number of ballots cast is wonderful." - George Will
-
let me be clear on this....FELONS MUST BE ABLE TO VOTE! as long as they vote OBAMA!!!!!
-
In my old country, this kind of stunt is NOT allowed! NO PRISONERS allowed! You do your time! When you're finished that's the time you can vote again.
This is the first time that I'm outraged!
I'm always relaxed with my posts...
You're misinterpretting. Felons in the USA, lose the right to vote, after they are convicted, for the rest of their lives...at least in most states.
I think that that is fair.... you commit a felony, you forego the right to choose. But, for clarity, the push is not for inmates to vote.
-
right. acorn recruits only honest taxpaying citizens who can verify that at some point they might have been breathing.
-
Let felons vote but not troops serving overseas. :mad:
http://www.sodahead.com/question/121649/
-
I'm in favor of letting felons vote once they have served their sentence. Who they will vote for is beside the point. Any crime that deserves a lifetime of punishment deserves a lifetime of incarceration. Allowing the justice system to permanently disenfranchise otherwise participating members of society gives the government too much power.
-
people who have nothing because they are lazy and criminal and shortsighted are absolutely democrat voters.. democrats know that they can get these peoples vote every time...
The trick is.. you have to get em to have enough responsibility to get up.. make it to the polls.. and get into the booth and then.. not screw up on who they put their mark for.
Democrats have so much contempt for humans that they feel this is a valid way to gain power.
after all.. "the end justifies the means"
lazs
-
anax.. I am for giving convicts all their rights back once they have served their sentence.. No parole.
If they committed a robbery then they should be handed back their gun as they leave the prison. They used to do this. It was not a problem.
lazs
-
I'm in favor of letting felons vote once they have served their sentence. Who they will vote for is beside the point. Any crime that deserves a lifetime of punishment deserves a lifetime of incarceration. Allowing the justice system to permanently disenfranchise otherwise participating members of society gives the government too much power.
do you have any clue about which you babble?????
do you really understand anything about the human creature????
your one of those "meat house mentality" people who would allow YOU, yes YOU the honest working tax payer dish out billions upon billions in additional taxes to pay to maintain the ever rising prison population? because that is what it would come to in very short order if you lock them up forever. i have been home for 7ish years now, that 7 years at approximately a quarter million a year you have not had to pay in taxes because i have been home instaed of in prison. but does that mean i wont ever go back???? hell no it means that you have saved 3.5 million roughly in not having to pay to incarcerate me. will i stay out of trouble is a matter of what events transpire or what opportunities do or don't present themselves as my life proceeds.
but make no mistake, i am one of the exception not the rule in lasting as long as i have.
have you ever heard the word recidivism? let me explain it to you, better yet i will quote you the definition out of just one of the three legal dictionaries i have (no not because i am a lawyer, but because in my prior profession it is good to maintain a working knowledge of the law)
BLACKS LAW DICTIONARY SEVENTH ADDITION pages 1275 and 1276
recidivate (being the root word) To return to a "Habit" of criminal behavior; to relapse into crime. (emphasis added)
recidivation See recidivism
recidivism a tendency to relapse into a of criminal activity or behavior
recidivist one who has been convicted of "multiple" (emphasis added) criminal offences, usu. similar in nature; a repeat offender<proponents of prison reform argue that prisons dont cure the recidivist>
my point to stating these words and the definitions for you is so that you will understand the following statement, i wish i could quote it but i cant remember who it was that said it. it was something on the news a few months back in which they were discussing crime in America and the official stated:
"recidivism in the United States are at an all time high, the percentage of convicted felons returning to a criminal life style and subsequent re incarceration within the first 3 years after their initial release is approximately 89 to 93%"
so the point to my tirade is that just because you have paid for a prior capture and incarceration does not mean that you have learned anything from it, that you are now magically relieved of your criminal nature or that you are a person worth trusting with the future safety and well being of the rest of society.
take a look at these sights to get a little understanding of our criminal rates and stats.
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/ucr.htm (http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/ucr.htm) http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/ (http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/) http://www.leaderu.com/orgs/probe/docs/crime.html (http://www.leaderu.com/orgs/probe/docs/crime.html)
i mean no disrespect or any harsh feeling, but you are naive in this matter. you are wonderfully simple in your belief of how and what a felon would be upon his reentry into society. i envy you your naivety in this matter, but unfortunately i know what i know and that is that although the fox may have been released from the snare he is still not to be allowed to rule the roost!
FLOTSOM
-
I believe the recidivism rate unfortunately disqualifies nearly all violent felons from gaining their rights back. If they can figure out a way to EFFECTIVELY punish criminals for their crimes, then I would have no problem giving back 100% american rights the moment they stop out the prison door.
-
Allowing the justice system to permanently disenfranchise otherwise participating members of society gives the government too much power.
Justice system didn't disenfranchise them......they did that to themselves. Not being able to vote is just a very small part of a sentence. I would think most felons would have much more to worry about than voting.
-
Justice system didn't disenfranchise them......they did that to themselves. Not being able to vote is just a very small part of a sentence. I would think most felons would have much more to worry about than voting.
i agree, the government didn't do it. the actions of the individual is the direct cause of their lack of rights.
but keep this in mind, the right to vote for the almost 4 to 5 million felons in America (currently serving and those released and now under no supervision) would bring a huge turning point in any presidential election, it constitutes over 2% of our population.
now that may not sound like allot, but if you consider that on average less than 60% of people eligible to, actually vote in any given election. that 2% now jumps to almost 4% (this does not encompass the current criminals that are not incarcerated or released after a felony conviction, i.e. gangs tend to have dozens or even hundreds of members but only a part of them have been convicted of a felony conspired with the masses but committed by only a few. when i was arrested for sales and conspiracy to distribute pot it was only me and 1 other arrested out of the 200 or more people that i was involved with) and when you look at how close some of the resent election have been you may turn the tides by that small seemingly inconsequential amount.
now if you get a candidate who promises to radically restore the rights of felons after release and adopt a forgive and forget policy, you will have millions of family members and friends who all believe they will be helping their convicted felon family member or friend by voting for this candidate. thus adding 25 maybe 30 million or more votes to that candidate. now you could be looking at lopsided landslide in any election. soon after you would be looking at radical changes in the laws that protect the average citizen. whenever we have tried to pamper and "there there" criminals it is the innocence of the average people that pays the price.
how do we fix them???? no idea. but i know that to hand any control of civilization to them is sure path to the destruction of all society.
FLOTSOM
-
Flotsom, read what I wrote a second time, even lazs got it on the first try. ;)
In a legal system the punishment expiates the crime. That's the point of punishment. If punishment doesn't expiate then there's no point in punishing. We must not confuse law and civil rights with morality.
Add disenfranchisement to the inability to find employment, if you do want to go straight, and the recidivism rates we have ought to surprise no one.
-
reread....... but i still disagree. those who have intentionally and with aforethought commits any action which the penalty is in at least in part a surrender of their rights, have also shown that they are not the people you want to give a vote to.
"Allowing the justice system to permanently disenfranchise otherwise participating members of society gives the government too much power."
the percentage of those who would become "participating members of society" upon their release is so small that the harms risked by the return of these rights to the masses is over powering. the risk to the populace is too great.
the legal system attempts to balance the punishment against the crime commited without putting an unduly burdensome load upon the tax paying society at large.
if your 12 year old child shows a fascination with playing with matches you ground him, when he gets off grounding do you give him a fuel can and a lighter? you cannot remove the propensity to commit an act by warehousing an individual. they are the same person after release as they were before you locked them away.
i agree with you that morality is far removed from law, i have watched men who have commited multiple crimes against children do months in jail and then be released, while people who have commited trivial crimes such as shop lifting do years on top of years for their transgressions. not very moral but it is what it is unfortunately.
most criminals (who are intentional criminals) chose to disenfranchise themselves from society long before they were convicted of any crime. it is the only way they can commit their acts without guilt. in their minds they turn the other (society at large) into the aggressor against them (the criminal) and he/she can do anything they want to anyone else without regret, because he/she were the victims of society first. I'm sure you've heard them all......my daddy was mean to me...my mother was a drunk...society didn't GIVE ME whatever.......i couldn't have this or that...they are holding me down..blah blah blah. these are all just excuses to justify ones actions.
My mother is the reason i argrue this point with you, my fear is that she would ever become the victim of someone with my lack of empathy towards the plight of the common man. her rights to live in safety and peace out way the civil rights of anyone who has already shown themselves to be a danger to her. including by the voting into office of anyone who would slacken the penalties for those who intentionally brake the laws by the very people who intend to break these laws.
this disenfranchisement is in the end the safest way of protecting those who would live their life in an honest fashion. the purpose of having a government is to protect the rights and safety of the public at large. to hinder the government that was established for this purpose by allowing those who would prey upon society to aid in the election of those who will lead that government is self defeating at best, societal suicide is the inevitable outcome.
I <SALUTE> your opinion, and if i was less the arrogant me than i am, maybe i would agree with you. but i would rather remove the rights of a few than to risk the safety of the masses (or my MOM).
<SALUTE>
FLOTSOM
-
Whether or not to sacrifice the individual for the sake of society: therein lies the difference of opinion.
-
Whether or not to sacrifice the individual for the sake of society: therein lies the difference of opinion.
I agree and <SALUTE> our diference in this matter. somewhere between the two opinions must lay the logical path.
<SALUTE> and best of wishes to you and yours!!
FLOTSOM
-
freakin star trek liberals..
-
You guys still dont get it. The world where "dont tread on me" meant something died back about the time the atomic bomb was created.
Get with the program already and have your electronic chip implanted. I recommend just south of the apple.
-
Get with the program already and have your electronic chip implanted. I recommend just south of the apple.
But if i did wouldnt that be abrasive on your tongue??? :rofl :rofl :rofl :rock
-
But if i did wouldnt that be abrasive on your tongue??? :rofl :rofl :rofl :rock
if my tongue on your apple was a requirement for freedom then I would have to re-examine my core values from the sack up.
-
if my tongue on your apple was a requirement for freedom then I would have to re-examine my core values from the sack up.
:rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl
the price of freedom is never free!!!!!!
:devil :devil
-
You guys still dont get it. The world where "dont tread on me" meant something died back about the time the atomic bomb was created.
Get with the program already and have your electronic chip implanted. I recommend just south of the apple.
On a more serious note, in a lot of states they already take a DNA sample from anyone who enters police custody, involuntarily, even if you're never convicted of a crime. Again, in the name of protecting society.
Where's lazs to say it all sounds like a Rand novel? :uhoh
-
On a more serious note, in a lot of states they already take a DNA sample from anyone who enters police custody, involuntarily, even if you're never convicted of a crime. Again, in the name of protecting society.
Got a question for you, if you got drunk and got arrested and they took a sample of your DNA and kept it on file then lets say 5 or so years later you are wrongfully accused by some woman who say you look like the guy that raped her. but the police dept, prior to arresting you and scaring you reputation forever, compares your DNA to that already on file, wouldn't you be grateful for the time in police custody you never had to spend? or the looks of doubt you will forever have to deal with from friends family and neighbors?
it is identical to having your finger prints on file, if your not guilty it can only help you, if your guilty well to bad.
FLOTSOM
-
Did any one even bother to read the article?
take a look before you start making false assumptions that show your ignorance, whether it be unintentional ignorance or not...
only a minority of states don't allow ex-felons to vote, it just so happens a possible swing state, VA, is one of those states.
(http://msnbcmedia2.msn.com/j/msnbc/Components/Photo/_new/081004-FELONS-VOTE-vmed-4p.widec.jpg)
-
well i was talking about a federal felony conviction, not a state conviction. so it is my understanding that a federal felony prevents a person from voting, it trumps state law in this matter. i could be mistaken, but that is what i was lead to believe upon my release from federal prison.
aside from the fact that this was a discussion based upon opinions of how people felt about allowing ex-felons to vote and the manipulation of a candidate in this matter, and not a debate on what is or is not allowed by individual states, keep in mind that it is unreasonable to develop an attitude towards someone due to the failure to read one particular article out of how many millions of articles that are located somewhere in internet-land? if you wish to draw attention to it then post it and we will read it.
-
You actually think 4,000,000 felons are going to register to vote???? Big brother would have their addy... LOL and even if some did, the percentage would be minimal. More bull media reporting.
-
You actually think 4,000,000 felons are going to register to vote???? Big brother would have their addy... LOL and even if some did, the percentage would be minimal. More bull media reporting.
Good point.
-
You actually think 4,000,000 felons are going to register to vote????
ACORN will help them. A ride to the polls and a pack of cigarettes.
-
I have a couple friends who have volunteered for ACORN work here in Raleigh.
It makes me happy thinking about how much they are pissing most of the o'club off.
:D
-
THAT, ladies & gents, is what a Community Organizer does. :lol
-
THAT, ladies & gents, is what a Community Organizer does. :lol
Pisses off the o'club? If so, I'd have to agree. Nothing like some community organizations to piss off the o'club properly.
-
I'm in favor of letting felons vote once they have served their sentence. Who they will vote for is beside the point. Any crime that deserves a lifetime of punishment deserves a lifetime of incarceration. Allowing the justice system to permanently disenfranchise otherwise participating members of society gives the government too much power.
By this logic, you would agree felons should be allowed to bear arms as well?
-
Pisses off the o'club? If so, I'd have to agree. Nothing like some community organizations to piss off the o'club properly.
No, no. Not that. It's community organizers that are running the "lets get all the felons to register & vote scheme." :lol
-
My friends went door to door canvasing and registering voters in local communities. Seems pretty normal to me. Didn't hear about them being asked to try to come up with ways to commit voter fraud or anything.
Weren't a bunch of repub votes from dead people found in the records for 2000 in Ohio or something? If we're going to dig into the voter fraud issue I'm sure we'll find plenty of shady people from both political systems.
Oh, now I see why ACORN pisses all the republicans off, they are: " the nation’s largest grassroots community organization of low- and moderate-income people"
everyone knows republicans hate poor people. :lol
[/sarcasm]
-
By this logic, you would agree felons should be allowed to bear arms as well?
Yes. Not only based on principal, but because I would rather felons have legal firearms than enable a black market for them. Felons who want weapons already get them, so this would only change the legal status.
I should be clear that full restoration of rights after time served should go along with major reform of the penal system. As things are now prison is often training for future criminality, and we send too many petty drug offenders away to spend time with real criminals.