Bernie Sanders Says He Would Let Boston Marathon Bomber, Sex Predators And Murderers Vote

[Vastator]

Very true, many don’t, but criminals are pretty assuredly not going to have. The recidivism rates of felons is high. If they vote, they will not vote according to sound judgement, but will more than likely vote against it. And in so doing, step on the rights of those that have chosen to follow the laws of the land, through sound judgement, so as to be able retain their voting rights, as they see fit, even though we may not agree to their decisions. It steps on the rights of their victims, as well.

When you take away all incentive to obey our laws, it leads to disenfranchisement of all others that do, and gives free reign to the criminal.

Many convicted felons return to their life of crime. They are also given a chance to petition for the restoration of their rights. Keep your nose clean, they could be.
Criminals don’t usually have the best interests of the country in mind.

Of course. They are evil therefore vote Democrat.

Twitter

Communists and Socialists need votes.
Even from criminals.
The desperation is pretty clear when you listen to Bernie ramble on about what he believes.
The right to vote doesn't exist.
If you abuse the privilege you shouldn't be allowed to vote.

This is what happens when you let criminals vote.

While I can certainly see the logic behind not letting the incarcerated vote. I’ve yet to hear a compelling argument for keeping those who’ve served their time from voting. In fact I can think of numerous nefarious reasons for keeping such people from voting. But I haven’t heard a “good” one yet...

Lots of voters don’t have what I perceive to be in “the best interest” of the country in mind. That’s wholly subjective; person to person Not very compelling...

When you disenfranchise people, you take away all incentive to follow the law. The numbers of those convicted aren’t so great, that they could overrule the vote of the majority. And Those who make poor voting decisions tend to do so repeatedly, much like your notion of recidivism. That’s hardly a trait unique to those who’ve been “caught, and convicted” of breaking a law. I’m just not seeing a moving argument here. Unless the argument is that one wants to politically neuter any who’ve transgressed certain laws, from affecting lawful change, in the laws through the power of the vote. Then I could see the motivation quite clearly...

 

[Vastator]

But isn't a law to stop ex-felons from owning a gun pointless because they are criminals who will break the law anyway?

So maybe them not having the right to vote is pointless too -- since they all will vote illegally anyway -- which is great because now you have a new boogeyman to blame losing future elections on...minorities, illegals and felons

There is no such thing as an ex-felon.

You might as well shoot everyone sentenced to jail or prison then, because with an attitude like yours, no one who is ever released will have a chance at living their life legally and normally.

Once again you prove your ignorance. I said nothing of the sort. I stated there is no such thing as an ex-felon. It is like being pregnant! You either are or you are not, dumbass!

Pregnancy ends, moron. So do prison sentences. So should judgment.

Why is it that you cannot resist the urge to prove your stupidity at every opportunity?

You are either a felon or you are not. There are no shades of gray, just like you can be pregnant or not pregnant. There is no middle ground.

Not really true, as compared to pregnancy. The laws, and penalties differ from state to state. A felon is merely a person convicted of a crime that “could be” punished by more than 1 year in jail. Those punishments differ from state to state. What may be a felony in one state; may not even be a crime in another. Much like Massachusetts bump stock law was recently.
Whereas being pregnant doesn’t differ from state to state. Or under any other conditions for that matter...

 

[Aponi]

Once you pay your debt to society the convicted person should have certain rights restored.

Why

 

[Vastator]

Once you pay your debt to society the convicted person should have certain rights restored.

Why

Why shouldn’t they. The debt to society has in this example been repaid. Are you in favor of life sentences for all transgressions?

 

[Vastator]

It steps on the rights of their victims, as well.

When you take away all incentive to obey our laws, it leads to disenfranchisement of all others that do, and gives free reign to the criminal.

Many convicted felons return to their life of crime. They are also given a chance to petition for the restoration of their rights. Keep your nose clean, they could be.
Criminals don’t usually have the best interests of the country in mind.

Of course. They are evil therefore vote Democrat.

Twitter

Communists and Socialists need votes.
Even from criminals.
The desperation is pretty clear when you listen to Bernie ramble on about what he believes.
The right to vote doesn't exist.
If you abuse the privilege you shouldn't be allowed to vote.

This is what happens when you let criminals vote.

While I can certainly see the logic behind not letting the incarcerated vote. I’ve yet to hear a compelling argument for keeping those who’ve served their time from voting. In fact I can think of numerous nefarious reasons for keeping such people from voting. But I haven’t heard a “good” one yet...

Lots of voters don’t have what I perceive to be in “the best interest” of the country in mind. That’s wholly subjective; person to person Not very compelling...

Another person voting, in no way steps on the rights of another. Any more than anyone voting opposite the candidate I prefer is stepping on my rights.
And free men SHOULD have “free reign”. It’s that whole “freedom” thing this country claims to value, and be so proud of.

 

[mudwhistle]

Let's let this dirtbag vote.......

 

[Weatherman2020]

It steps on the rights of their victims, as well.

When you take away all incentive to obey our laws, it leads to disenfranchisement of all others that do, and gives free reign to the criminal.

Many convicted felons return to their life of crime. They are also given a chance to petition for the restoration of their rights. Keep your nose clean, they could be.
Criminals don’t usually have the best interests of the country in mind.

Communists and Socialists need votes.
Even from criminals.
The desperation is pretty clear when you listen to Bernie ramble on about what he believes.
The right to vote doesn't exist.
If you abuse the privilege you shouldn't be allowed to vote.

This is what happens when you let criminals vote.

While I can certainly see the logic behind not letting the incarcerated vote. I’ve yet to hear a compelling argument for keeping those who’ve served their time from voting. In fact I can think of numerous nefarious reasons for keeping such people from voting. But I haven’t heard a “good” one yet...

Lots of voters don’t have what I perceive to be in “the best interest” of the country in mind. That’s wholly subjective; person to person Not very compelling...

Another person voting, in no way steps on the rights of another. Any more than anyone voting opposite the candidate I prefer is stepping on my rights.
And free men SHOULD have “free reign”. It’s that whole “freedom” thing this country claims to value, and be so proud of.

A. Electing political leadership involves responsibilities. Felons lack those responsibilities.

B. Bernie and Harris want felons behind bars electing our political leadership.

 

[OldLady]

I have voiced this opinion in this forum before, but I again ask all to consider the import of three words: "Quality of voters."

Can you deny that the Democrat party is bound and determined to minimize the Quality of Voters - AS A MATTER OF POLICY.

Consider:

• 18-year-olds,
• college students (who have never worked, paid taxes, supported themselves, etc.),
• criminals,
• people who don't care enough to register to vote in advance of voting day,
• people who need a ride to the polls (and don't care enough to get there on their own),
• people too lazy to register to vote in the conventional way, and can be registered when applying for a drivers' license.

What can you say about a political party that constantly mines the population for people whose votes inevitably lower the Quality of the overall voter pool, thus making it better for charlatans, fakes, fraudsters, and kooks.

And look at the score of announced Democrat candidates for President. It all makes sense.

What can you say about a political party that is scared shitless whenever the number of people who vote goes up

Why are almost all felons Democrats?

You have linked evidence to back that up, right?

Thanks for looking to me once again to educate you.
I’m always her for you.

Jail survey: 7 in 10 felons register as Democrats

INteresting how your link doesn't say how many felons register at all? Are you asserting that they ALL do?

Since I worked in a prison in Maine, I can tell you that the inmates who took advantage of the opportunity to vote was well under 10%. And these guys had not much else to do, and a huge flat screen in the common room of each dorm that was turned onto a news channel a good part of the day, daily paper delivered. So it isn't like they couldn't learn what the issues were.

Not all but many people in prison are poor. And the poor are a whole lot smarter than we give them credit for--they KNOW that voting isn't going to do a goddamned thing to change their world. So they shun the whole thing.

 

[mudwhistle]

What can you say about a political party that is scared shitless whenever the number of people who vote goes up

Why are almost all felons Democrats?

You have linked evidence to back that up, right?

Thanks for looking to me once again to educate you.
I’m always her for you.

Jail survey: 7 in 10 felons register as Democrats

INteresting how your link doesn't say how many felons register at all? Are you asserting that they ALL do?

Since I worked in a prison in Maine, I can tell you that the inmates who took advantage of the opportunity to vote was well under 10%. And these guys had not much else to do, and a huge flat screen in the common room of each dorm that was turned onto a news channel a good part of the day, daily paper delivered. So it isn't like they couldn't learn what the issues were.

Not all but many people in prison are poor. And the poor are a whole lot smarter than we give them credit for--they KNOW that voting isn't going to do a goddamned thing to change their world. So they shun the whole thing.

Being smart and having common-sense are two different things.
My brother went to prison and got out, then spent the rest of his life on pain-killers and collecting welfare. He had an I.Q. of 150.
He voted for Democrats because he didn't have any other option.
They kept telling him that Republicans were trying to take his benefits away.
The problem with that the state often changed how much his check was around election time to scare him into voting for Democrats.
Democrats buy votes.
They accuse Republicans of helping the rich when in fact they're helping business owners so they can create more jobs.
All Democrats want to do is make everyone poor and raise taxes.......and steal elections so they can do more of the above.

 

[OldLady]

Besides Vermont, Maine is the only state in the US where a felon does not need to restore their right to vote once they have been released from jail or prison. Instead, they can vote while they are still incarcerated.

give 'em some guns while we're at it.

ALL STATES allowed qualified white male prisoners to vote from the time of our founding fathers, until after the Civil War, when black men were given the right to vote in the 15th Amendment.

After 1870, Southern States began changing their laws to prevent men imprisoned from voting, then all other states but 2, Maine and Vermont, followed these southern states, and banned prisoners from voting..... they did this, because they wanted to keep mostly black men, from voting.

At the time, these black men, would have been primarily Republicans....

Maine and Vermont did not change their laws, like all other States.... not because they did not want to disenfranchise Blacks from voting, but because these 2 states had less than 1% of their population that were Black, few in prison that were Black...

great.

so give 'em some guns while we're at it.

the founding fathers did not think that was a good idea, back then... so no such thing was allowed by them or the States, yet voting was allowed when in prison...

Makes sense though.... early in our creation, people were much more aware of the power of government officials, and the tyranny they could impose with their power, especially if they were corrupted by it... allowing prisoners to be heard thru their vote, when they think they have legitimate grievances with the laws or judicial system that put them there, seems like a check on the system, so to say...

I think murderers probably got the death penalty back then, via hanging, so it's likely they were not around to vote...

I read an article yesterday that I can't find now, saying there were no laws prohibiting prisoners from voting until after the Civil War, when blacks were given the right to vote. Then all of a sudden, these prohibitions sprung up. Apparently, back then there also was a large percentage of black men in prison. Times don't change all that much.

 

[iceberg]

Besides Vermont, Maine is the only state in the US where a felon does not need to restore their right to vote once they have been released from jail or prison. Instead, they can vote while they are still incarcerated.

give 'em some guns while we're at it.

ALL STATES allowed qualified white male prisoners to vote from the time of our founding fathers, until after the Civil War, when black men were given the right to vote in the 15th Amendment.

After 1870, Southern States began changing their laws to prevent men imprisoned from voting, then all other states but 2, Maine and Vermont, followed these southern states, and banned prisoners from voting..... they did this, because they wanted to keep mostly black men, from voting.

At the time, these black men, would have been primarily Republicans....

Maine and Vermont did not change their laws, like all other States.... not because they did not want to disenfranchise Blacks from voting, but because these 2 states had less than 1% of their population that were Black, few in prison that were Black...

great.

so give 'em some guns while we're at it.

the founding fathers did not think that was a good idea, back then... so no such thing was allowed by them or the States, yet voting was allowed when in prison...

Makes sense though.... early in our creation, people were much more aware of the power of government officials, and the tyranny they could impose with their power, especially if they were corrupted by it... allowing prisoners to be heard thru their vote, when they think they have legitimate grievances with the laws or judicial system that put them there, seems like a check on the system, so to say...

I think murderers probably got the death penalty back then, via hanging, so it's likely they were not around to vote...

I read an article yesterday that I can't find now, saying there were no laws prohibiting prisoners from voting until after the Civil War, when blacks were given the right to vote. Then all of a sudden, these prohibitions sprung up. Apparently, back then there also was a large percentage of black men in prison. Times don't change all that much.

to me it simply isn't a racial issue. while *everything* these days seems to be - the fact is, you're in prison, odds are you did *something* to get there and *rights* are suspended. no guns, no voting, no tooling around town in your buick, yea, it sucks but that's prison.

all the "well this race is picked on by that race" i just don't get into. it gives a huge gray area for people to say their race guides their decisions when to me, they guide their own. if they choose to use race as a guide, that doesn't always work. that doesn't make the other person racist anymore than it makes the one doing it racist.

 

[Polishprince]

Of course. They are evil therefore vote Democrat.

Twitter

It would certainly change the nature of political campaigning. What does a politician say to pander to the votes of the nation's Paedophile and Islamonazi populations?

Were you aware that homosexuals in the penitentiary are not permitted to get legally Gay-Married to their cellies?

 

[Vastator]

It steps on the rights of their victims, as well.

When you take away all incentive to obey our laws, it leads to disenfranchisement of all others that do, and gives free reign to the criminal.

Many convicted felons return to their life of crime. They are also given a chance to petition for the restoration of their rights. Keep your nose clean, they could be.
Criminals don’t usually have the best interests of the country in mind.

While I can certainly see the logic behind not letting the incarcerated vote. I’ve yet to hear a compelling argument for keeping those who’ve served their time from voting. In fact I can think of numerous nefarious reasons for keeping such people from voting. But I haven’t heard a “good” one yet...

Lots of voters don’t have what I perceive to be in “the best interest” of the country in mind. That’s wholly subjective; person to person Not very compelling...

Another person voting, in no way steps on the rights of another. Any more than anyone voting opposite the candidate I prefer is stepping on my rights.
And free men SHOULD have “free reign”. It’s that whole “freedom” thing this country claims to value, and be so proud of.

A. Electing political leadership involves responsibilities. Felons lack those responsibilities.

B. Bernie and Harris want felons behind bars electing our political leadership.

I don’t agree with letting the currently incarcerated vote. Isolation from the social structure is part of incarceration.

As far as divorcing the previously convicted from their social responsibilities; it’s safe to assume that in a show of principled consistency, that you believe felons should be free of the burden of paying taxes, and following all laws, post conviction then... Yes?

 

[ptbw forever]

Once you pay your debt to society the convicted person should have certain rights restored.

Talk about the actual OP and quit deflecting.

 

[OldLady]

Why are almost all felons Democrats?

You have linked evidence to back that up, right?

Thanks for looking to me once again to educate you.
I’m always her for you.

Jail survey: 7 in 10 felons register as Democrats

INteresting how your link doesn't say how many felons register at all? Are you asserting that they ALL do?

Since I worked in a prison in Maine, I can tell you that the inmates who took advantage of the opportunity to vote was well under 10%. And these guys had not much else to do, and a huge flat screen in the common room of each dorm that was turned onto a news channel a good part of the day, daily paper delivered. So it isn't like they couldn't learn what the issues were.

Not all but many people in prison are poor. And the poor are a whole lot smarter than we give them credit for--they KNOW that voting isn't going to do a goddamned thing to change their world. So they shun the whole thing.

Being smart and having common-sense are two different things.
My brother went to prison and got out, then spent the rest of his life on pain-killers and collecting welfare. He had an I.Q. of 150.
He voted for Democrats because he didn't have any other option.
They kept telling him that Republicans were trying to take his benefits away.
The problem with that the state often changed how much his check was around election time to scare him into voting for Democrats.
Democrats buy votes.
They accuse Republicans of helping the rich when in fact they're helping business owners so they can create more jobs.
All Democrats want to do is make everyone poor and raise taxes.......and steal elections so they can do more of the above.

My sympathies to your brother. I have a half brother who is also in very poor health and on opiates every day. It is sad to see him suffer.

 

[Vastator]

Besides Vermont, Maine is the only state in the US where a felon does not need to restore their right to vote once they have been released from jail or prison. Instead, they can vote while they are still incarcerated.

give 'em some guns while we're at it.

ALL STATES allowed qualified white male prisoners to vote from the time of our founding fathers, until after the Civil War, when black men were given the right to vote in the 15th Amendment.

After 1870, Southern States began changing their laws to prevent men imprisoned from voting, then all other states but 2, Maine and Vermont, followed these southern states, and banned prisoners from voting..... they did this, because they wanted to keep mostly black men, from voting.

At the time, these black men, would have been primarily Republicans....

Maine and Vermont did not change their laws, like all other States.... not because they did not want to disenfranchise Blacks from voting, but because these 2 states had less than 1% of their population that were Black, few in prison that were Black...

great.

so give 'em some guns while we're at it.

the founding fathers did not think that was a good idea, back then... so no such thing was allowed by them or the States, yet voting was allowed when in prison...

Makes sense though.... early in our creation, people were much more aware of the power of government officials, and the tyranny they could impose with their power, especially if they were corrupted by it... allowing prisoners to be heard thru their vote, when they think they have legitimate grievances with the laws or judicial system that put them there, seems like a check on the system, so to say...

I think murderers probably got the death penalty back then, via hanging, so it's likely they were not around to vote...

I read an article yesterday that I can't find now, saying there were no laws prohibiting prisoners from voting until after the Civil War, when blacks were given the right to vote. Then all of a sudden, these prohibitions sprung up. Apparently, back then there also was a large percentage of black men in prison. Times don't change all that much.

True. And oh how easy it would be to bestow “Felon” status upon ones political opposition. Just look at the 2nd amendment infringements people tolerate.
Why not forbid their freedom of association, their ability to speak freely, be a journalist, while we’re at it. Hey given such a precedent; we can also subject them to warrantless searches, and seizures. Even force them to house troops... Why not..?

 

[OldLady]

give 'em some guns while we're at it.

ALL STATES allowed qualified white male prisoners to vote from the time of our founding fathers, until after the Civil War, when black men were given the right to vote in the 15th Amendment.

After 1870, Southern States began changing their laws to prevent men imprisoned from voting, then all other states but 2, Maine and Vermont, followed these southern states, and banned prisoners from voting..... they did this, because they wanted to keep mostly black men, from voting.

At the time, these black men, would have been primarily Republicans....

Maine and Vermont did not change their laws, like all other States.... not because they did not want to disenfranchise Blacks from voting, but because these 2 states had less than 1% of their population that were Black, few in prison that were Black...

great.

so give 'em some guns while we're at it.

the founding fathers did not think that was a good idea, back then... so no such thing was allowed by them or the States, yet voting was allowed when in prison...

Makes sense though.... early in our creation, people were much more aware of the power of government officials, and the tyranny they could impose with their power, especially if they were corrupted by it... allowing prisoners to be heard thru their vote, when they think they have legitimate grievances with the laws or judicial system that put them there, seems like a check on the system, so to say...

I think murderers probably got the death penalty back then, via hanging, so it's likely they were not around to vote...

I read an article yesterday that I can't find now, saying there were no laws prohibiting prisoners from voting until after the Civil War, when blacks were given the right to vote. Then all of a sudden, these prohibitions sprung up. Apparently, back then there also was a large percentage of black men in prison. Times don't change all that much.

to me it simply isn't a racial issue. while *everything* these days seems to be - the fact is, you're in prison, odds are you did *something* to get there and *rights* are suspended. no guns, no voting, no tooling around town in your buick, yea, it sucks but that's prison.

all the "well this race is picked on by that race" i just don't get into. it gives a huge gray area for people to say their race guides their decisions when to me, they guide their own. if they choose to use race as a guide, that doesn't always work. that doesn't make the other person racist anymore than it makes the one doing it racist.

I never would have connected the prison voting with race if I hadn't seen that article. I have heard that rumor before but didn't know if it was true. Sad statement.
My viewpoint is that inmates are as affected by our laws as anyone else and their right for their voice to be heard should not be interfered with. This argument has nothing to do with guns, btw, so don't keep raising that issue.

 

[iceberg]

ALL STATES allowed qualified white male prisoners to vote from the time of our founding fathers, until after the Civil War, when black men were given the right to vote in the 15th Amendment.

After 1870, Southern States began changing their laws to prevent men imprisoned from voting, then all other states but 2, Maine and Vermont, followed these southern states, and banned prisoners from voting..... they did this, because they wanted to keep mostly black men, from voting.

At the time, these black men, would have been primarily Republicans....

Maine and Vermont did not change their laws, like all other States.... not because they did not want to disenfranchise Blacks from voting, but because these 2 states had less than 1% of their population that were Black, few in prison that were Black...

great.

so give 'em some guns while we're at it.

the founding fathers did not think that was a good idea, back then... so no such thing was allowed by them or the States, yet voting was allowed when in prison...

Makes sense though.... early in our creation, people were much more aware of the power of government officials, and the tyranny they could impose with their power, especially if they were corrupted by it... allowing prisoners to be heard thru their vote, when they think they have legitimate grievances with the laws or judicial system that put them there, seems like a check on the system, so to say...

I think murderers probably got the death penalty back then, via hanging, so it's likely they were not around to vote...

I read an article yesterday that I can't find now, saying there were no laws prohibiting prisoners from voting until after the Civil War, when blacks were given the right to vote. Then all of a sudden, these prohibitions sprung up. Apparently, back then there also was a large percentage of black men in prison. Times don't change all that much.

to me it simply isn't a racial issue. while *everything* these days seems to be - the fact is, you're in prison, odds are you did *something* to get there and *rights* are suspended. no guns, no voting, no tooling around town in your buick, yea, it sucks but that's prison.

all the "well this race is picked on by that race" i just don't get into. it gives a huge gray area for people to say their race guides their decisions when to me, they guide their own. if they choose to use race as a guide, that doesn't always work. that doesn't make the other person racist anymore than it makes the one doing it racist.

I never would have connected the prison voting with race if I hadn't seen that article. I have heard that rumor before but didn't know if it was true. Sad statement.
My viewpoint is that inmates are as affected by our laws as anyone else and their right for their voice to be heard should not be interfered with. This argument has nothing to do with guns, btw, so don't keep raising that issue.

but it has to do with our rights overall to me. i *do* see a difference but don't feel someone in prison has a voice in the direction of this country. not while in prison anyway. when out - unless they were in for election fraud or something then yes - they get their rights back - time served, move on.

guns are also something that even upon release many should just lose the right to have/own. again, depending on the crime but yes, that is a different issue.

as for voting and voting alone - i don't think prisoners should be allowed. to. we keep drifting to releasing people of responsibility for poor decisions and what is going to stop people from continuing to make these decisions if we keep lessening the impact of it for "human concerns".

sooner or later we have to give "tough love" - not make things easier.

 

[Mac1958]

Looks like Bernie's trying to stick out from the crowd.

Oy, politics.

 

[iceberg]

give 'em some guns while we're at it.

ALL STATES allowed qualified white male prisoners to vote from the time of our founding fathers, until after the Civil War, when black men were given the right to vote in the 15th Amendment.

After 1870, Southern States began changing their laws to prevent men imprisoned from voting, then all other states but 2, Maine and Vermont, followed these southern states, and banned prisoners from voting..... they did this, because they wanted to keep mostly black men, from voting.

At the time, these black men, would have been primarily Republicans....

Maine and Vermont did not change their laws, like all other States.... not because they did not want to disenfranchise Blacks from voting, but because these 2 states had less than 1% of their population that were Black, few in prison that were Black...

great.

so give 'em some guns while we're at it.

the founding fathers did not think that was a good idea, back then... so no such thing was allowed by them or the States, yet voting was allowed when in prison...

Makes sense though.... early in our creation, people were much more aware of the power of government officials, and the tyranny they could impose with their power, especially if they were corrupted by it... allowing prisoners to be heard thru their vote, when they think they have legitimate grievances with the laws or judicial system that put them there, seems like a check on the system, so to say...

I think murderers probably got the death penalty back then, via hanging, so it's likely they were not around to vote...

I read an article yesterday that I can't find now, saying there were no laws prohibiting prisoners from voting until after the Civil War, when blacks were given the right to vote. Then all of a sudden, these prohibitions sprung up. Apparently, back then there also was a large percentage of black men in prison. Times don't change all that much.

True. And oh how easy it would be to bestow “Felon” status upon ones political opposition. Just look at the 2nd amendment infringements people tolerate.
Why not forbid their freedom of association, their ability to speak freely, be a journalist, while we’re at it. Hey given such a precedent; we can also subject them to warrantless searches, and seizures. Even force them to house troops... Why not..?

imma gonna raise my hand and just admit you lost me here.

calling someone a "felon" doesn't make them one. works for "racist" i suppose but there is no legal course to follow to arrive there, people just do it when they don't like you.

if you're speaking of prisoners i believe they can be searched at any time. and if troops needed to stay in prison with prisoners then i guess we could look into they why's behind that.

if you're speaking of non prisoners then i have no idea where you're headed.

<waiting on energy drink to kick in>