Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

News

Flip

Original poster

Prisoners voting. I just can't decide.

22 replies

penelopestitsdropped · 10/02/2011 13:57

Ok it has been all over the news about Prisoners being able to vote amd i can't decide which way i feel about it.

I think i want to think that it is wrong. that they gave up their rights to vote and to be a member of society when they commited a crome worthy to see them imprisoned.

But the other part of me thinks that actually, they should have a vote if they have a term less than say, 2 years.

Firstly i think this because we have signed up to be ruled by the european court of human rights. we as a nation decided that we would go along with their rulings. this was already agreed. we can't really decide that now they have said somethign we don't like that we want to ignore them.

and secondly, you vote to form a government for the next 4 years. if you are only in prsion for the next few months you will still have to be released into the world under teh givernment decided upon by others.

I am a fimr believer of "if yo didn't vote then don#t moan"
So if a prisoner is not allowed to vote but is still expected tolove by the rules decided upon by a government he didn't elect.

So now i have managed to confuse myself and can't decide which part of me ibu

OP posts:

Iwantscallops · 10/02/2011 13:59

There is no doubt in my mind. They should not be able to vote.

2cats2many · 10/02/2011 13:59

I don't agree with the Tories very often, but I do on this issue.

If you can't do the time, don't do the crime, as far as I'm concerned.

cyb · 10/02/2011 14:00

I agree with 2cats

Iwantscallops · 10/02/2011 14:01

Anyway, maybe the prisoner voted before they committed their crime and still broke the rules?

Also, what goverment is going to legalise burglary, violent crime, etc? None!

Original poster

penelopestitsdropped · 10/02/2011 14:02

but i am thinking that for them to have a sentance less than 24 months ( i think the tories were saying 12 months even) then we arent' talking about murerers and rapsist.

though the other part of me is thinking that prison terms seem to be few and far between and so the crime must have been either serious or the person a serial offender to have been sent to prison.

I need someone to convince me one way or another

OP posts:

cyb · 10/02/2011 14:02

Also if prisoners were that bothered about being part of a democratic society they would'nt have broken the laws of that society

PictureThis · 10/02/2011 14:03

I wholeheartedly agree that they should lose their right to vote.

smallwhitecat · 10/02/2011 14:03

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

Original poster

penelopestitsdropped · 10/02/2011 14:03

oh dear. looks like im more pinko liberal than i thought.

OP posts:

BringOnTheGoat · 10/02/2011 14:04

Prison is meant to be punishment - giving up of usual freedoms and rights. They should not have the vote - along with TV and other luxuries. The prison in US (can't remember where - saw it on a TV doc) where they only have cartoons on TV and pink overalls is getting it about right - if they run out of space they erect tents, they don't allow criminals to walk free!

ragged · 10/02/2011 14:09

Oh, I'm way more PinkoLiberal than you, Penelope. On this one, anyway (lots of other things, no).

Do we want to punish people forever (beyond the stigma of having a a criminal record and reputation), or do we want to try to rehabilitate them? Do we want them to feel part of society again, that they should feel part of the mainstream, and invested in our joint future? Or would you rather they felt they had no contribution and no role to play and therefore, why should they give a shit how the world turns out or try to be part of changing it for the better?

I think you have to choose, what do you want to happen to ex-prisoners? Should they be marginalised in every way or should we try to persuade them to have a stake in our group welfare?

I believe in trying to rehabilitate when we can, so at least some prisoners having the vote seems very reasonable.

TheCrackFox · 10/02/2011 14:13

I too think they shouldn't have the vote. They can quit whining and I think they should have to pay their legal costs too (if it doesn't have anything to do with the reason they are originally in prison) as there are far too many of these time wasting legal cases coming from bored prisoners.

RippTorn · 10/02/2011 20:58

Speaking as someone who has been arrested and charged for a minor offence, had I gone to prison, I wouldn't have had any expectations to vote, even though I wasn't harming anyone except possibly myself. However, prisoners do get out, do go to work and pay taxes and do support families after their sentences. They also sometimes commit crimes because they have been backed into a corner by the very machine that wants to rob them of their say. Prisoners, no matter what they have done, are human beings. Granted, some have taken others' dignity, their possessions, sometimes their lives, and the government is right to distinguish between serious crime and more minor offences - who here or anywhere can say that everything in life is black or white and that they have never done anything illegal, either knowingly or unknowingly? - because, I, Like ragged believe in second chances and abhor hypocrites. I am what one could call 'reformed', I worked at improving my life and succeeded, and I have faith that others could be too. Who are those people who are so perfect that they can sit in such harsh judgement of others? They obviously think, quite wrongly, that their sh*t don't stink! Maybe your life has been blessed - well, count yourselves lucky. Down in amongs the pondlife thinks are murky, laced with darkness and desperation. If you were there you do not know how you would react and you do not know if your principle would stay in tact. Fact.

David51 · 14/02/2011 13:45

I would argue that being locked up 24 hours a day is enough punishment without taking away the right to vote as well. And giving prisoners the vote might help rehabilitate them into society and make them less likely to offend, which is what any sensible person should want.

However the main reason for giving prisoners the vote is that an international court that we are signed up to has decided that that is what we should do. We may not like this but we can't just pick and choose which decisions we are going to agree to.

I want to have a government that obeys the law because if they don't obey it why should the rest of us?

redhappy · 14/02/2011 15:20

I'm with ragged on this one. I think it's far too simplistic to say bad people break the law so we send them to prison, so let's not allow them any further opportunity to do bad (eg. giving them a voice by voting).

The reasons people end up in prison are complex and I believe education and rehabilitation are the way forward. Otherwise we write off a whole segment of our society as somehow inferior and less deserving, just through birth.

You can go to prison for not paying a tv licence fine. Do you really think someone should have their voice taken away from them for something like that?

Ryoko · 14/02/2011 16:15

I think they should have the vote and mental patients as well.

we might end up with a decent government next time.

chocolatemarshmallow · 15/02/2011 09:37

I think I agree with Ragged and red, though I am also on the fence I'm afraid. I agree with you penelope, it seems overly simplistic to decide one rule for all 'prisoners' as if they are somehow a cohesive group, when the differences between them and their offences can be absolutely enormous. I think your 'under two years sentence and you still get a vote' sounds quite reasonable.

chandellina · 15/02/2011 19:54

i don't think they should vote. I can't even vote and I've lived here 10 years and pay taxes, etc.

AppleyEverAfter · 17/02/2011 14:17

I think they should get the vote. I know someone in prison and he has had his dignity completely stripped from him, he has 8 years of hell to look forward to and insists he is innocent (as are many prisoners but that's another story!). Why deny prisoners the one thing which may shape the law in future? Politics is something everyone should be involved in, and prisoners may not have their freedom but many will be out in the next few years and therefore be living under a government they have not had a chance to vote for or against. So what if they've broken the law? Jeez, everyone makes mistakes. Not to mention I'm guessing Labour would get a lot more votes, can't imagine why they tried to block this when they were in power.

AppleyEverAfter · 17/02/2011 14:21

BTW I think blocking the European law, which ultimately the UK will have to abide by or leave the European Council, is just another excuse for Cameron to back away from Europe.

PaperView · 17/02/2011 14:29

Being in prison should be a punishment - no votes/tv/luxury items/etc - as soon as you have been released, and therefore paid for your crime IYSWIM, then you get to live as a normal member of society and with that the voting etc.

TheCoalitionNeedsYou · 17/02/2011 15:13

It makes no difference either way. It is political storm in a teacup designed to allow politicians to show off.

Giving prisoners the vote will make no difference to deterrence, offending levels, election results or rehabilitaion.

Not giving prisoners the vote will make no difference to deterrence, offending levels, election results or rehabilitaion.

So lets just give them the vote avoid the fine and get on with something important instead.

Flip