Perspective: How Many Conservatives Would Kill You?

[Wry Catcher]

Why the hell should we let criminals affect our policies? The shits couldn't follow the law, why should they be involved in voting? I consider that as part of the price for committing crimes; "civil death" is the official term. - Felony disenfranchisement - Wikipedia

Anti suffrage is anti democratic, and a goal of the Republican Party's conservative wing. We punish people by fines or a loss of liberty (jail/prison); those who advocate taking away the right to vote is voter suppression, plain and simple; a necessary component of the Republican's goal of keeping sole power over We the People.

Universal suffrage is one of the great checks and balances in our nation's long history of stability in government. Power transfers back and forth, when the party in power overreaches and becomes too authoritarian and too insulated from the people, they will seek change.

During the past six months, more and more citizens have lost faith in the Executive and Legislative Branches, and if not corrected we can expect a sea change once again in Nov. 2018.

I think you are a hypocrite
you talk about felons being able to vote afer their sentence is done, but I bet you are fine with felons being denied other basic human rights for the rest of their lives

You would lose that bet. The only restriction on the rights of a felon that I would support is to deny a violent felon the right to own, possess or have in his or her custody and control a gun.

However, California made a major adjustment in the late 70's which in my experience created serious problems. Before these "reforms", for example, a 459 PC (burglary) had a sentence range of 5 years to life. Parole could be granted for good time, allowing the parole authority to release the convict after serving half that time (2.5 years); however, the offender could remain on parole for life.

After serving time and being paroled the offender had Terms and Conditions to follow. If s/he violated any Term or Condition the parolee could be returned to prison after a Morrissey Hearing (see: Morrissey v. Brewer, 408 U.S. 471 (1972)) without the cost of a trail for a short stint, or for life.

The down side to the "reform" left prisoners with no motivation to cooperate with the staff or institution, and they had no goal since their 'date' was fixed by the legislature. The Consequence being the rise of prison gangs, higher rates of recidivism and since parole was "reformed" too, and was only for six months.

You would lose that bet. The only restriction on the rights of a felon that I would support is to deny a violent felon the right to own, possess or have in his or her custody and control a gun.

Why? You want them to have all rights of a free man, why not the right to own a gun? Are you a fucking hypocrite? Yes you are...

Please don't respond to my posts or threads, when you do I feel the need to shower.

 

[bitter clinging swiftie]

Why the hell should we let criminals affect our policies? The shits couldn't follow the law, why should they be involved in voting? I consider that as part of the price for committing crimes; "civil death" is the official term. - Felony disenfranchisement - Wikipedia

Anti suffrage is anti democratic, and a goal of the Republican Party's conservative wing. We punish people by fines or a loss of liberty (jail/prison); those who advocate taking away the right to vote is voter suppression, plain and simple; a necessary component of the Republican's goal of keeping sole power over We the People.

Universal suffrage is one of the great checks and balances in our nation's long history of stability in government. Power transfers back and forth, when the party in power overreaches and becomes too authoritarian and too insulated from the people, they will seek change.

During the past six months, more and more citizens have lost faith in the Executive and Legislative Branches, and if not corrected we can expect a sea change once again in Nov. 2018.

I think you are a hypocrite
you talk about felons being able to vote afer their sentence is done, but I bet you are fine with felons being denied other basic human rights for the rest of their lives

You would lose that bet. The only restriction on the rights of a felon that I would support is to deny a violent felon the right to own, possess or have in his or her custody and control a gun.

However, California made a major adjustment in the late 70's which in my experience created serious problems. Before these "reforms", for example, a 459 PC (burglary) had a sentence range of 5 years to life. Parole could be granted for good time, allowing the parole authority to release the convict after serving half that time (2.5 years); however, the offender could remain on parole for life.

After serving time and being paroled the offender had Terms and Conditions to follow. If s/he violated any Term or Condition the parolee could be returned to prison after a Morrissey Hearing (see: Morrissey v. Brewer, 408 U.S. 471 (1972)) without the cost of a trail for a short stint, or for life.

The down side to the "reform" left prisoners with no motivation to cooperate with the staff or institution, and they had no goal since their 'date' was fixed by the legislature. The Consequence being the rise of prison gangs, higher rates of recidivism and since parole was "reformed" too, and was only for six months.

You would lose that bet. The only restriction on the rights of a felon that I would support is to deny a violent felon the right to own, possess or have in his or her custody and control a gun.

Why? You want them to have all rights of a free man, why not the right to own a gun? Are you a fucking hypocrite? Yes you are...

Please don't respond to my posts or threads, when you do I feel the need to shower.

you probably are overdue for one anyway, you nasty hoe

 

[Wry Catcher]

Why the hell should we let criminals affect our policies? The shits couldn't follow the law, why should they be involved in voting? I consider that as part of the price for committing crimes; "civil death" is the official term. - Felony disenfranchisement - Wikipedia

Anti suffrage is anti democratic, and a goal of the Republican Party's conservative wing. We punish people by fines or a loss of liberty (jail/prison); those who advocate taking away the right to vote is voter suppression, plain and simple; a necessary component of the Republican's goal of keeping sole power over We the People.

Universal suffrage is one of the great checks and balances in our nation's long history of stability in government. Power transfers back and forth, when the party in power overreaches and becomes too authoritarian and too insulated from the people, they will seek change.

During the past six months, more and more citizens have lost faith in the Executive and Legislative Branches, and if not corrected we can expect a sea change once again in Nov. 2018.

I think you are a hypocrite
you talk about felons being able to vote afer their sentence is done, but I bet you are fine with felons being denied other basic human rights for the rest of their lives

You would lose that bet. The only restriction on the rights of a felon who had completed their sentence that I would support is to deny a violent felon the right to own, possess or have in his or her custody and control a gun.

{California made a major adjustment in the late 70's which in my experience created serious problems. Before these "reforms", for example, a 459 PC (burglary) had a sentence range of 5 years to life. Parole could be granted for good time, allowing the parole authority to release the convict after serving half that time (2.5 years); however, the offender could remain on parole for life.

[After serving time and being paroled the offender had Terms and Conditions to follow. If s/he violated any Term or Condition the parolee could be returned to prison after a Morrissey Hearing (see: Morrissey v. Brewer, 408 U.S. 471 (1972)) without the cost of a trail for a short stint, or for life.]

[The down side to the "reform" left prisoners with no motivation to cooperate with the staff or institution, and they had no goal since their 'date' was fixed by the legislature. The Consequence being the rise of prison gangs, higher rates of recidivism and since parole was "reformed" too, and was only for six months.]

For a lot more detail on this issue, see:

http://scholarship.law.berkeley.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2883&context=facpubs

and,

Sentencing, Incarceration, & Parole

that is exactly what Im talking about...you are a hypocrite...being armed is a basic human right

Wrong again. You see life as a simple black and white issue, a simple thinker does that, and in your case thinker might be an inappropriate word to use to describe your posts.

 

[bitter clinging swiftie]

Why the hell should we let criminals affect our policies? The shits couldn't follow the law, why should they be involved in voting? I consider that as part of the price for committing crimes; "civil death" is the official term. - Felony disenfranchisement - Wikipedia

Anti suffrage is anti democratic, and a goal of the Republican Party's conservative wing. We punish people by fines or a loss of liberty (jail/prison); those who advocate taking away the right to vote is voter suppression, plain and simple; a necessary component of the Republican's goal of keeping sole power over We the People.

Universal suffrage is one of the great checks and balances in our nation's long history of stability in government. Power transfers back and forth, when the party in power overreaches and becomes too authoritarian and too insulated from the people, they will seek change.

During the past six months, more and more citizens have lost faith in the Executive and Legislative Branches, and if not corrected we can expect a sea change once again in Nov. 2018.

I think you are a hypocrite
you talk about felons being able to vote afer their sentence is done, but I bet you are fine with felons being denied other basic human rights for the rest of their lives

You would lose that bet. The only restriction on the rights of a felon who had completed their sentence that I would support is to deny a violent felon the right to own, possess or have in his or her custody and control a gun.

{California made a major adjustment in the late 70's which in my experience created serious problems. Before these "reforms", for example, a 459 PC (burglary) had a sentence range of 5 years to life. Parole could be granted for good time, allowing the parole authority to release the convict after serving half that time (2.5 years); however, the offender could remain on parole for life.

[After serving time and being paroled the offender had Terms and Conditions to follow. If s/he violated any Term or Condition the parolee could be returned to prison after a Morrissey Hearing (see: Morrissey v. Brewer, 408 U.S. 471 (1972)) without the cost of a trail for a short stint, or for life.]

[The down side to the "reform" left prisoners with no motivation to cooperate with the staff or institution, and they had no goal since their 'date' was fixed by the legislature. The Consequence being the rise of prison gangs, higher rates of recidivism and since parole was "reformed" too, and was only for six months.]

For a lot more detail on this issue, see:

http://scholarship.law.berkeley.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2883&context=facpubs

and,

Sentencing, Incarceration, & Parole

that is exactly what Im talking about...you are a hypocrite...being armed is a basic human right

Wrong again. You see life as a simple black and white issue, a simple thinker does that, and in your case thinker might be an inappropriate word to use to describe your posts.

some things are simply black and white.....rights are one of those things
you are either too dangeorus to won a firearm, in which case you should be locked up, or you are a free person, in which case you have the right to have whatever you want

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

Why the hell should we let criminals affect our policies? The shits couldn't follow the law, why should they be involved in voting? I consider that as part of the price for committing crimes; "civil death" is the official term. - Felony disenfranchisement - Wikipedia

Anti suffrage is anti democratic, and a goal of the Republican Party's conservative wing. We punish people by fines or a loss of liberty (jail/prison); those who advocate taking away the right to vote is voter suppression, plain and simple; a necessary component of the Republican's goal of keeping sole power over We the People.

Universal suffrage is one of the great checks and balances in our nation's long history of stability in government. Power transfers back and forth, when the party in power overreaches and becomes too authoritarian and too insulated from the people, they will seek change.

During the past six months, more and more citizens have lost faith in the Executive and Legislative Branches, and if not corrected we can expect a sea change once again in Nov. 2018.

I think you are a hypocrite
you talk about felons being able to vote afer their sentence is done, but I bet you are fine with felons being denied other basic human rights for the rest of their lives

You would lose that bet. The only restriction on the rights of a felon that I would support is to deny a violent felon the right to own, possess or have in his or her custody and control a gun.

However, California made a major adjustment in the late 70's which in my experience created serious problems. Before these "reforms", for example, a 459 PC (burglary) had a sentence range of 5 years to life. Parole could be granted for good time, allowing the parole authority to release the convict after serving half that time (2.5 years); however, the offender could remain on parole for life.

After serving time and being paroled the offender had Terms and Conditions to follow. If s/he violated any Term or Condition the parolee could be returned to prison after a Morrissey Hearing (see: Morrissey v. Brewer, 408 U.S. 471 (1972)) without the cost of a trail for a short stint, or for life.

The down side to the "reform" left prisoners with no motivation to cooperate with the staff or institution, and they had no goal since their 'date' was fixed by the legislature. The Consequence being the rise of prison gangs, higher rates of recidivism and since parole was "reformed" too, and was only for six months.

You would lose that bet. The only restriction on the rights of a felon that I would support is to deny a violent felon the right to own, possess or have in his or her custody and control a gun.

Why? You want them to have all rights of a free man, why not the right to own a gun? Are you a fucking hypocrite? Yes you are...

Please don't respond to my posts or threads, when you do I feel the need to shower.

I didn't know that Occupy Wall street people shower?