to think that prisoners shouldn't have the right to vote?

[LadyOfTheManor]

Blah blah blah human rights. Surely they gave up their human rights when they committed anti-civilised/social crimes?

The EU courts are putting pressure on...I think it's ridiculous. They shouldn't have a say of how society is treated when they have been purposefully removed from it.

I say we make voting "legal" for them. But deny them the right to leave the prison in order to do it. Surely that would work?

If the law calls for a national "call of duty" and you don't "sign up" or "go forward" then you would be imprisoned for breaking the law.

If you are imprisoned you do not get the right to vote.

how about the people who have sentancing such as prohbation, fines ect, they have commited a crime so in therory shouldn't be allowed to vote.

i think every one should have a vote, unless thet are unable to make to choice themselves

Fines/probation/community service etc, are usually for crimes that don't "deserve" prison sentences- according to the judges.

You wouldn't get a fine for say rape or armed robbery.

if govt changed the law so that it calls for bigots to be slammed in the jail and refused their vote, where will you be then?

For anyone interested in what the ECtHR said here's the judgement

I'm sorry what makes me bigoted? The fact that I believe if you are removed from society you shouldn't have ANY say in how it is run?

so how about the people on remand, surely they should get a vote

1. Where the period of disqualification may in fact extend beyond the end of the prison term.

1. There is no bar but no arrangements are made to enable prisoners to vote.

1. The right to vote is removed from prisoners sentenced to terms exceeding one year and if they committed the crime with intent.

1. A restriction on voting applies to prisoners accused of serious violations of international law or indicted before the international tribunal.

1. Prisoners may vote if the right is given by the court.

1. Restrictions apply to prisoners sentenced to terms of over ten years, while life imprisonment attracts a permanent deprivation of the right to vote. For terms of one to ten years, courts may also restrict the right to vote for one to five years where a prisoner?s conduct shows moral perversity.

1. Serious offenders and bankrupts sentenced to terms of five years or more automatically lose the right to vote, while minor offenders debarred from holding public office lose this right at the discretion of the judge.

1. Unless the sentencing court removes civil rights as part of sentencing.

1. Prisoners convicted of a serious crime lose the right to vote.

10. The right to vote may be revoked by a court, although this is very rare and possibly restricted to treason and national security cases.

11. Prisoners sentenced to terms of three years or more where the crime is blameworthy (very serious) may lose the right to vote.

12. Unless, as occurs only rarely, the sentencing judge expressly removes the right to vote.

8. CIVIL rights, not human rights.

Prisoners on remand have the right to vote.

I fail to see what LOTM has said is bigotted

Me too

Surely, according to the majority of the posters, we should just free prisoners, as locking them up is surely "against their human rights"?

who is saying that? I certainly am not. I just believe that human rights should apply, like they were intended, to all humans. just because someone is a criminal does not make them "non-human".

So you agree to a human being "caged up" or "behind bars" but you can't fathom the idea that they don't get a vote?

YABU

If we're taking away the right to vote if you're in prison on what basis are we doing that? Plenty of people break the law, lots don't go to prison for it so it can't just be that if you break the law then you don't get to participate. 200 odd MPs voted to break the (European) law today and the government have been breaking it for years on this matter.

For me, it's a slippery slope. So we oppose it for prisoners, who is next? People with a low IQ, people in a nursing home or mental institution? Who is deciding the criteria for being eligible to vote? What is it based on?

I believe that the right to vote should be universal, not circumstance specific, so that means EVERYONE gets the vote regardless of specific circumstances.

Also, what are the negatives? So we let prisoners vote, erm, ok then. No harm done, civic duty done (which can only be a good thing for disenfranchised members of society) by prisoners.

I agree with the Op, they committed a crime so loose their rights to vote

I do if they deserved it. I do believe that there should be restrictions on their rights and freedoms but not all of them. I'm looking at it as a bigger picture. What's the point of having human rights if they don't apply to everybody. The concept of human rights came about after the atrocities of the Nazi party. Human rights are there to stop governments from doing the same thing again. They are the most basic rules for a government and they should adhere to them.

But why dictate how a society is run when they are not involved in it?

I agree that the politics aren't really about prisoners having the right to vote - the fuss from MPs is largely from those who hate the Human Rights Act and European Convention full stop.

Funny how these are the sort of people who usually make a fuss about being patriotic and British values. Yet the European Convention was a British idea promoted by Winston Churchill and largely drafted by British lawyers. We should take pride in the role of our country in establishing inalienable rights - the idea obviously being 'never again' wrt WW2 and the rise of Nazism.

Let's not forget the crucial role the European Court of Human Rights has played in upholding the rights of women, particularly in relation to equal pay where large swathes of the public sector had been getting away with paying women less than men for FOUR DECADES after the Equal Pay Act. And in many other crucial decisions that protect the vulnerable against the powerful.

a few prisoners is hardly dictating it though is it? They are involved any way though not directly. Should they not have a say in how the health service is ran? Legal aid budgets? generally standing up for what they believe in. They do have families as well. Should they not be able to vote for a party that promises to help those with dementia, if their granny has dementia? IYSWIM not all voting is done just looking out for yourself. And not all prisoners are there for life. They will be part of society again when they come out.

A few prisoners? A few? Checked statistics recently have you?

If their wives/husbands/grannies want better facilities then they can vote. Prisoners get what they are given on the whole-and looking at prisons around the world they get it very good indeed.

Being in prison doesn't mean you're not involved in society, you still have family, children and friends who would be impacted by gov policy and the prisoners themselves would of course be affected by penal reform.

Not allowing them to vote achieves nothing. A complete lack of participation will further erode prisoners respect for the legitimacy and power of law.

Prisoners shouldn't be allowed to vote imho.

Next they'll be saying that curtailing their liberty is a violation of their human rights.

Yes, I suppose it is, but that's what happens when you commit a crime.

And, no, I don't read the Daily Mail

just did there is just over 88,000 as of 4th feb 2011. population of the uk approx 62 million thats 0.14% of the population. last voting turnout approx 64%. so if there was similar prisoner voting thats 56320 votes. thats a similar number to the amount of votes for the english democrats in 2010. those votes didn't change the world.

it's only half of the votes for the BNP thats a scary thing.