According to The Sentencing Project, 5.3 million Americans (1 in 40 adults) were unable to vote due to a felony conviction in the 2008 election. This included 1.4 million African-American men, more than 676,000 women, and 2.1 million sex-offenders who have completed their sentences. That was an enormous amount of people not being able to cast their vote. There ae three important reasons why anyone who has committed a felony and has respectfully served their time, should be able to vote again.
My first reason for returning ex-felons their right to vote is because, they are still affected by the choices of politicians. Ex-felons still have to deal with all the different laws that are created by politicians. “Felons
…show more content…
While these people are still a part of our democratic society, I think it’s inappropriate and unfair to take away their right to choose the people affecting their lives. My second reason for returning ex-felons their right to vote is because felony disenfranchised citizens. In a lot of cases these people commit felonies because of failed social structures. It is a type of discrimination. I think whatever form of felony you commit that’s what privilege you should lose. For example, if you get charged with armed robbery, you should lose you privilege to bear firearms. “A right is not a privilege and therefore should not be taken away, unless the crime committed relates to or specifically abuses that particular right” (“Felons Voting- Center for Equal Opportunity”). My final reason for returning ex-felons their right to vote is because we as a country needs to stop dividing and unit. The right to vote in America is one the main ingredients of democracy. A democracy includes everyone in America, not just people you think are good. We need to give these people a chance improve themselves. For this country to become better and for this democracy to work, you cannot exclude a large
"Too many Americans go to too many prisons for far too long, and for no good law-enforcement reason … Although incarceration has a role to play in our justice system, widespread incarceration at the federal, state and local levels is both ineffective and unsustainable. . . We need to ensure that incarceration is used to punish, deter and rehabilitate – not merely to convict, warehouse and forget"(Holder). Former Attorney General Eric Holder does not dispute that prisons play an important role in the justice system. He believes that along with punishing the inmate’s prisons should provide them with rehabilitation. With the already overpopulated prison system across the US there should be alternative for lesser nonviolent offences.
To be blunt if we keep denying released felons the right to vote we will keep losing touch with the fundamentals of our democracy. Our poll numbers will keep going down and people who want to vote won’t be able to. We will be denying them a helpful tool for reintegration or rehabilitation even if it doesn’t it might show us when someone is ready to become apart of society and stop reckless behavior. Also, just like in the case of Leola Strickland let people who just made a small mistake and still want to vote another
.... This is why we have freedom, and everyone has the right to decide for themselves.
In the United States 2.2 million citizens are incarcerated on felony charges. Laws in America prohibit felons from voting. As a result, on Election Day 5.3 million citizens of America are disenfranchised because of crimes they once committed. Though they once broke the law, they have served their time and have been punished adequately in accordance with the American Justice System. Felons should regain full voting rights after their stint in prison.
Many people believe that felons do not deserve the right to vote. For these people, voting is not an inherent right; rather it is a privilege given to deserving people that wish to make a positive change to their lives. Some believe that, “…there is no reason for a felon to vote or to debate about whether or not they have that right…they made the choice to break the law, so why should they have any say in making it?” {Siegel} In this point of view, giving felons the right to vote is similar to rewarding them. With the right to vote, felons are still able to sway decisions regarding the lives of a society they are no longer a part of. Felons are meant to be punished, stripped of numerous rights including that of voting. Punishments, then, are made to restrict a person, not give them more freedom and decision.
Felon voting laws limit the restrictions for a felon to vote on any election. “Felon voting has not been federally regulated because some people argue that Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act can be tied to felon disenfranchisement and the Congress has the authority to legislate felon voting in federal elections.” Felon disenfranchisement is excluding people otherwise eligible to vote from voting due to conviction of a criminal offence, usually restricted to the more serious class of crimes, felonies. According to the National Conference of State Legislatures and The Sentencing Project, 1 in 40 adults were unable to vote due to a felony conviction in the 2008 elections. One purpose of the felon voting laws is the uncertainty of trusting
I believe that instead of incarcerating them they should be put in facilities that will help them get treatment for their disabilities, disorders, and drug addictions. If they are being rehabilitated the right way it will help prevent further crimes and also will help the offender go back into society and live a crime free lifestyle. For Christel Tribble being locked up actually helped her out to realize that she doesn’t want to be a delinquent. She was motivated by her mother to continue her education and to realize that it’s not worth being in the court system at such a young age because it will be a never ending cycle. For Keith Huff, he went to Kentucky State prison five times serving a total of 27 years in the criminal justice system. He was incarcerated for drug problems, which in the long run won’t help him. It would be more beneficial for him to receive help to prevent him from using drugs. If they sent him to a rehabilitation center where he can receive the appropriate help he need it would prevent him from future imprisonment. As for Charles McDuffie he was an addict and a Vietnam veteran suffering from PTSD. He was sentenced to prison, which was no help for him in his situation dealing with PTSD. He needed mental health treatment to help him deal with the tragedies that he was remembering from the Vietnam War. Luckily when McDuffie got out of prison his friends, who
Once released from prison, he or she is deemed a felon. Losing the right to vote, not being able to serve on a jury, and inability to enforce his or her second amendment is just a few of the disadvantages of serving time, but this is just the textbook interpretation. There is no much more that is at stake when you step foot behind bars. Once a person gains their freedom the better question to ask is what wasn’t taken form them? Their job if there was one in the first place, their children, their family, and most importantly the part of the person that made them a member of society.
Individuals convicted of a felony should not lose their right to vote. The right to vote is a
Criminal disenfranchisement is defined as the loss of the right to vote by a person convicted of or sentenced to imprisonment for a felony. Since before the civil war, this practice has been a part of the United States justice system mostly as a means to handle the racial issues with voting but then also in regards to the felons and rebels that participated in the Southern “rebellion” during the Civil War. This practice has recently gained some popularity since a debate has developed as to whether it is unconstitutional or not. Is voting a right or a privilege?
In most states ex-felons are not allowed to vote. This takes away a large portion of the voting population because of how many ex-felons there are right now and the many more that will be in the future. Ex-felons may also have a very hard time finding a job or a place to live. Legally landlords are allowed to deny an ex-felon. In Carbondale Illinois rental properties owners “Home Rentals” does background checks to make sure that none of their potential renters are felons. If they are felons Home Rentals claims that they will deny them the privilege of living in one of their properties. Ex-felons may also have a hard time finding jobs. Not many employers are willing to employ ex-felons for the fear of more crime or less commitment. Though denying these ex-felons jobs will not help the economy, only giving them jobs can help that.
Aftercare programs are used often with juveniles in hopes of preventing recidivism. Recidivism is of high concern to the criminal justice system in that the safety of the public depends on low recidivism rates. Juvenile Incarceration facilities have programs set up, such as education and pro-social behavior classes, to promote bettering the juvenile’s life. However, research has shown that the progress made while incarcerated slowly declines upon release. This is testimony to the importance of aftercare programs in preventing recidivism.
An individual should be able to make his or her own decisions about how they live their life. Unfortunately though, not everyone feels the same way about this. That is how the controversy is created. This is why transgender rights should be strengthened in America not only because it is morally correct, but also because it would ease the lives of the people within this group, reduce the discrimination and harassment rates of transgender individuals, and help establish awareness. Living life as a transgender person is not easy.
...niors who brought us into this generation. We deserve to be protected as much as any other human race. Our tax dollars spent on housing inmates are a lot cheaper for us to pay when one considers the cost of irreparable pain and suffering, of a victim who falls prey to a parolee who had no intention of reversing his or her former lifestyle and recommitted their life to crime. One cannot put a price tag on scarred lives. It would be worth every penny to keep these criminals behind bars until they have completed their full sentences, if it meant even saving one innocent life, or sparing someone an unforgettable damaging experience. In conclusion, parole serves to benefit the inmate who is seeking his or her freedom, while society seldomly benefits from progress or efforts implemented by parolees in the community. We must understand that parole is a privilege, not a right. We must take into consideration that if almost half of the population that is released on parole returns to prison; parole is not working and should be abolished. Law abiding citizens have earned their right to freedom, and criminals have earned their right to confinement, and should remain that way, as sentenced.
In The Washington Post, Reid Wilson says, “Having a job significantly reduces the recidivism rate for prior offenders” (1). This indicates that if ex-offenders receive the opportunity to reintegrate into society by receiving the same opportunities as others, they are less likely to commit crimes again. Sauders and Stacer argue state “criminal history question on a job application constitutes an “insurmountable barrier” to employment because ex-offenders expect to be rejected and become more likely to avoid the labor market, increasing their odds of recidivism” (1188). In other words, if ex-offenders are denied the opportunity to get a job they are most likely to commit more crimes. Giving ex-offenders a second chance by allowing them to apply without their criminal record affecting them is extremely beneficial because it is a way in which a person can once again be part of society. As humans we all commit mistakes, and we all deserve a second chance to prove others that the mistake has made them a better person and that we can change for