B
BornInMarch
Guest
If someone has committed a crime, then they need to face some form of punishment. If it is a severe crime, then that punishment should be being sent to prison until their debt to society is repaid and a parole board decides they are fit to re-enter society.
But then after a convict is paroled, he/she (depending on the jurisdiction) might not be able to vote.
On one hand, this is just one in a long line of cruel and unusual punishments American Prisoners face (a list which includes underfunded prison healthcare which results in prisoners dying, rampant prison rape which guards turn a blind eye to, and disproportionately long sentences).
On the other hand, the right to vote is what makes our society a democracy. When we read in history books about Women and African Americans being legally prevented from voting we rightfully see these as injustices. Yet ex-convicts, despite being told on their release that their debt to society was repaid, are sometimes denied this most basic right.
There are some arguments I have seen against granting ex-convicts a basic human right they are currently being denied, but no good arguments.
Argument 1: “Voting is not a big deal. it’s a minor part of the civic process and most free people don’t vote anyway.”
Any knowledge of history shows that voting is the biggest deal. Being unable to vote means that politicians have no reason to even pretend to care about prisoners. Politicians can compete with each other to be the hardest on crime, knowing full well that they won’t be losing any votes by doing so. If ex-convicts could vote they they would no longer be helpless whenever some egotistical politician decides to triple the mandatory minimum for drug possession, cut funding on reformatory programs that teach prisoners honest skills, or votes in favor of keeping the death penalty in their state.
Argument 2: “If we let prisoners vote, they will start advocating for the legalization of pedophelia and hard drugs.” (I honestly saw someone make this argument once)
No. First off, prisoners and ex-convicts do not make up a large enough part of the population to do this. Secondly, not all criminals are sex-offenders or drug users and to assume otherwise is offensive.
Argument 3: “Prisoners don’t deserve to vote.”
If you argue this, do you know what the word ‘inalienable’ means? It is used to describe a right that can NEVER justifiably be taken away. It’s not just a lofty idea, it shows up early on in the document that created The United States. “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”
Now, you don’t need to believe in the inherentness of human dignity to see why ex-convicts should have the vote: there are selfish reasons in favor of this too. Recidivism (when ex-convicts re-commit an offense and go back to prison) is really high in the United States, so much so that Private Owners of prisons like The GEO Group cite “high recidivism” as a selling point to investors. A big reason why prisoners return to a life of crime is that society refuses to give them a second chance, refuses to hire them for most jobs (90% of resumes where the ‘convict’ box is checked end up in the trash), and insists on designating them second class citizens.
We can discriminate against ex-convicts or we can work to turn them back into productive members of society, but we can’t do both.
But then after a convict is paroled, he/she (depending on the jurisdiction) might not be able to vote.
On one hand, this is just one in a long line of cruel and unusual punishments American Prisoners face (a list which includes underfunded prison healthcare which results in prisoners dying, rampant prison rape which guards turn a blind eye to, and disproportionately long sentences).
On the other hand, the right to vote is what makes our society a democracy. When we read in history books about Women and African Americans being legally prevented from voting we rightfully see these as injustices. Yet ex-convicts, despite being told on their release that their debt to society was repaid, are sometimes denied this most basic right.
There are some arguments I have seen against granting ex-convicts a basic human right they are currently being denied, but no good arguments.
Argument 1: “Voting is not a big deal. it’s a minor part of the civic process and most free people don’t vote anyway.”
Any knowledge of history shows that voting is the biggest deal. Being unable to vote means that politicians have no reason to even pretend to care about prisoners. Politicians can compete with each other to be the hardest on crime, knowing full well that they won’t be losing any votes by doing so. If ex-convicts could vote they they would no longer be helpless whenever some egotistical politician decides to triple the mandatory minimum for drug possession, cut funding on reformatory programs that teach prisoners honest skills, or votes in favor of keeping the death penalty in their state.
Argument 2: “If we let prisoners vote, they will start advocating for the legalization of pedophelia and hard drugs.” (I honestly saw someone make this argument once)
No. First off, prisoners and ex-convicts do not make up a large enough part of the population to do this. Secondly, not all criminals are sex-offenders or drug users and to assume otherwise is offensive.
Argument 3: “Prisoners don’t deserve to vote.”
If you argue this, do you know what the word ‘inalienable’ means? It is used to describe a right that can NEVER justifiably be taken away. It’s not just a lofty idea, it shows up early on in the document that created The United States. “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”
Now, you don’t need to believe in the inherentness of human dignity to see why ex-convicts should have the vote: there are selfish reasons in favor of this too. Recidivism (when ex-convicts re-commit an offense and go back to prison) is really high in the United States, so much so that Private Owners of prisons like The GEO Group cite “high recidivism” as a selling point to investors. A big reason why prisoners return to a life of crime is that society refuses to give them a second chance, refuses to hire them for most jobs (90% of resumes where the ‘convict’ box is checked end up in the trash), and insists on designating them second class citizens.
We can discriminate against ex-convicts or we can work to turn them back into productive members of society, but we can’t do both.
Just like revoking one’s drivers license doesn’t prevent people from driving with revoked licenses.
:clapping: