Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Rehabilitation programs affecting revidivism
Convicted felons voting rights discussion
Convicted felons voting rights discussion
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Rehabilitation programs affecting revidivism
Should Ex-Felons Be Allowed To Vote Imagine that you are a hardworking citizen laboring to benefit yourself and those around you, but because of your past mistakes you're not permitted to participate in any voting activities. We're all human and we all make mistakes as kids and as adults. Many of us seek forgiveness for our mistakes and learn from them. Ex-criminals are not that different from us. The only difference is that their mistakes were bigger than ours. We shouldn't strip these people of their precious right to have a choice in which they see fit to run their lives. Ex-criminals should be allowed to vote because many of them are innocent, they might change from their criminal …show more content…
By releasing someone out of prison that means that we believe that they served their time and deserve their freedom so then why don't we believe that they deserve their voting rights as well. We let ex-convicts marry, have children, buy alcohol, own a house and a car. But in many places, the fact that they can't be trusted to help choose our leaders is ludicrous. They have to pay taxes and bills to the government so why can't they have a choice on who controls all their hard earned money. The Eighth Amendment prohibits extra punishment for a crime, being unable to vote seems to be more than unnecessary. That means that these disenfranchisement laws are unconstitutional. Some might say that they have committed a serious crime that was a danger to society so therefore they should not be granted the right to vote. However if someone has completely paid for their mistakes to society, then society should return the favor and give them back their right to vote. By placing them in prison we choose what punishment is fit for the crime. So they should be able to vote because they have aready paid for the serious crime. When we release someone from jail we put them in a democratic society which means that the people elect the government officials. So why do we let them in a society where everyone has equal rights but we don't give them the same rights as everyone
Some people in our country can’t vote because they have felons for the same reason. They aren’t violent criminals, they just made a small mistake or two and now can’t have a voice in our political system because of it. You are in a sense taking away their voice and they think they no longer matter, they may even commit more crimes if they feel unwanted or left out. When released felons are released and have paid their debt to society denying them the right to vote it is essentially taxation without representation(3).
The feelings of allowing felons to vote is chilling; those who have been to prison have committed crimes and are out to get their rights back. But it is clear that felons should be “disenfranchised because they have broken the laws,” says Edward Feser, a philosophy professor and writer. Yet people are still questioning whether it is moral to keep felons from getting the rights to vote. Disenfranchising felons is unintentional in racial issues, and is used to punish felons to teach them that once they've broken the laws, they have lost their voting rights as well, and it would also keep felons from violating fellow citizens' voting rights.
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
The right to vote for non-citizens has become an increasingly controversial topic due to the strong and often divisive opinions of permanent Canadian residents. The capacity to vote is one of the most important and valued freedoms granted to individuals. Although the acceptance of non-citizen resident voting is frequently encouraged in order to propel self-governing justice and immigrant inclusion, opponents claim that it is in a nation’s best interest to delay voting rights to non-citizens. According to this claim, by preserving voting rights to citizens, non-citizens would have the social responsibility to actively learn the essential community services and self-ruled obligations necessary to earn their citizenship. In spite of this claim, non-citizens should be allowed to vote because the right to vote offers immigrants a more welcomed chance to contribute in the decision-making processes that take place in Canadian legislature. Seeing that this legislature administrates the rights and freedoms of the immigrant populations, it would only be just if immigrants had the right to elect candidates who spoke on behalf of their best interests.
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.
The United States is one of the only few democratic countries that disenfranchises convicted felons. An estimated 5.85 million people charged with a felony are banned from voting. Moreover, felon disenfranchisement laws are a form of racial discrimination because a large percentage of felons are Hispanic, Latino or African American that have been incarcerated as a result of racial profiling. Denying felons from voting is unconstitutional since the right to vote and cast a ballot is supposed to be the cornerstone of democracy. Felons who have completed their sentence should be restored their right to vote as they should be able to participate in elections just like every other citizen. Despite being charged with a felony, felons are also American
Individuals convicted of a felony should not lose their right to vote. The right to vote is a birth rights for citizens born in this country. This right is taken for granted by many and is exercised by far too few. As the United States prepares for its 57th presidential election over five million of its citizens will be denied their right to participate in the electoral process. Why would such a large number of people be denied a constitutional right?
The “Election and voting: Voter Identification” is a debate between three sides with different opinions about the voter identification law. Each side is represented by Chandler Davidson, Hans von Spakovsky, and Edward Foley. This debate is about whether the voter identification laws should be in place or not. Davidson is against the voting id laws stating its historical context and how it will affect the minorities, older and student during the election time. Spakovsky supports the law saying “the law would prevent voter fraud” and make elections strong and fair. Third, position held by Foley is that voter fraud is a problem and voter id law would help prevent it, but we need to make sure that everyone will have an easy access to the designated places.
The eighth amendment of the U.S Constitution has been a key part to the justice system from the moment it was created. It provides the basic rights that everyone deserves. The eighth amendment is very important because it guarantees many “freedom from” rights. For example, it protects Americans from cruel and unusual punishments. Without the eighth amendment many people would be punished in an inhumane manner based on the morals of the judge. The eighth amendment is crucial to the U.S Constitution because it promises that all citizens are guaranteed their rights, including the citizens who are felons and display criminal acts.
A major determining factor as to whether this type of punishment is considered constitutional is that of the 2nd clause of the 14th Amendment which repealed the Three-Fifths compromise, stating that the Penalty Clause which allowed the ability to vote to be revoked for those that participated in “rebellion or other crime”. This exception applied to criminals and also to those who had participated in the Southern “rebellion” during the Civil War. Even though this section of the Amendment states that it is not unconstitutional it is still a large debate as to whether states should be allowed to put restrictions on voting. (US Const., amend. XIV)
...he right to vote. I made a ten question survey that asked questions about letting convicted felons have the right to vote in major elections throughout America. Thirteen out of thirty high school students said that convicted felons should have the right to vote because they are American citizens. The other seventeen people I surveyed said that they should not have the right to vote because they had their chance to perform correctly in society and failed miserably. As you can now see, I have given you many reasons to see that convicted felons should not have the right to vote. They cannot be trusted with such a responsibility as voting for this country’s next leader.
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.
The root of Felon Disenfranchisement can be traced back to Greek and Roman laws. Where any person convicted of an infamous crime would lose his or her right to participate in polis. In Rome they would lose their right to participate in suffrage and to serve in the Roman legions. With the founding of the United States of America, the US Constitution gave the right to establish voting laws to the states. From 1776 - 1821 eleven states included felony disenfranchisement in their laws (Voter Registration Protection Act). By 1868 when the fourteenth Amendment was enacted eighteen states had adopted disenfranchisement laws. After the Civil War felony Disenfranchisement laws were used along with poll taxes and literary test to exclude African Americans from voting. The right to vote is considered to be one of the fundamental rights of citizenship in the United States. This right is more than just the right to mark a piece of paper and drop it in a box or the right to pull a lever in a voting booth. The right to vote includes the right to have a ballot counted for as a legal voting citizen. Although this right is considered fundamental, restrictions have been placed on this right. The main restriction is placed on persons convicted of a felony conviction all felonies not just infamous ones. Today on Election Day, as Americans wait in line to cast their vote over 4.65 million people are denied this most fundamental democratic right because of a past or present felony conviction.