| Author | Thread |
|
|
10/08/2008 01:01:39 PM · #76 |
| I guess I'll never understand why it's more acceptable to close threads than to tackle the outrageous claims made in them. |
|
|
|
10/08/2008 01:23:04 PM · #77 |
Originally posted by Louis:
I guess I'll never understand why it's more acceptable to close threads than to tackle the outrageous claims made in them. |
Perhaps the posts with such claims should have been hidden in the first place, but they weren't; at some point the discussion no longer pertains to the title of the thread, misleading anyone who has not followed it from the beginning.
Besides, the suggestion to resume the original discussion until there had been ample time for the counter-claims to have been stated as well, and experience has shown there is little further to be gained by indefinitely reiterating the claims/counterclaims.
Message edited by author 2008-10-08 13:23:41. |
|
|
|
10/08/2008 01:35:16 PM · #78 |
Originally posted by Louis:
I guess I'll never understand why it's more acceptable to close threads than to tackle the outrageous claims made in them. |
Not to worry. HawkeyeLonewolf will soon be appearing on another thread near you. |
|
|
|
10/08/2008 01:59:13 PM · #79 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Originally posted by trevytrev:
Originally posted by GeneralE:
If a felon is to be released back into society, doesn't it make sense that you would want them to become a productive, tax-paying "model citizen" rather than relapsing into their predatory ways?
As I recall, there was a little war fought a couple of centuries ago over the issue that if one paid taxes, one should have influence (through their designated) representative over how those taxes were structured and spent.
Every impediment you put in a felon's way through negative stigmatization reduces the odds of such a change in behavior. If they can't vote and can't get a job ("Ever been arrested" on a job app is a red flag), just how are they supposed to survive and become productive? |
So when the felon is released, regardless of what felony they committed, we should restore them to regular law abiding status? Let's throw out their criminal record, we wouldn't want them to feel stereotyped and held back by society with its cruel and unjust laws, despite the fact they have proven they don't follow those laws anyway. We might as well let the the pedophiles go teach kindergarten or let an armed violent criminal go buy another gun at the local sports store. I don't see how a criminals right to vote being taken away is impeding on his success in society. The issue in regard to employment is a private sector issue and an employer should have the right to know whether or not a person they are trying to hire has a prior criminal history.
I guess the next defense we will hear in court is that he committed that rape b/c he couldn't vote for his local representative due to a prior felony conviction. He's been disenfranchised by the system, the reality is that he's been disenfranchised by his own actions. |
Once they've completed their sentence and probation, why not allow for them to ask for their other rights to be restored as well?
Not all convicted felons are repeat offenders and hardened criminals, some just make mistakes and will never offend again. You'd just flog them all for a lifetime rather than allowing them to be productive members of society again. |
Ignorance or neglect "mistake" are not excuses the law will listen too. If you are convicted of a felony by your peers why is it so hard to understand that as part of your punushment you will lose certain rights. No one made you commit the felony. you did that on your own free will. At least we would hope or then it woud be another case. Basically it is the same if you denounce you citizenship you lose your rights also. When you choose to commit a crime of a certain level Felony in this arguement then you decided if you were caught you would lose your rights by your own decisions you made. come on people now we are in the market of making excuses for convicted Felons. It is remarkable how low some will go just to get a vote. |
|
|
|
10/08/2008 02:19:36 PM · #80 |
Originally posted by coronamv:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Originally posted by trevytrev:
Originally posted by GeneralE:
If a felon is to be released back into society, doesn't it make sense that you would want them to become a productive, tax-paying "model citizen" rather than relapsing into their predatory ways?
As I recall, there was a little war fought a couple of centuries ago over the issue that if one paid taxes, one should have influence (through their designated) representative over how those taxes were structured and spent.
Every impediment you put in a felon's way through negative stigmatization reduces the odds of such a change in behavior. If they can't vote and can't get a job ("Ever been arrested" on a job app is a red flag), just how are they supposed to survive and become productive? |
So when the felon is released, regardless of what felony they committed, we should restore them to regular law abiding status? Let's throw out their criminal record, we wouldn't want them to feel stereotyped and held back by society with its cruel and unjust laws, despite the fact they have proven they don't follow those laws anyway. We might as well let the the pedophiles go teach kindergarten or let an armed violent criminal go buy another gun at the local sports store. I don't see how a criminals right to vote being taken away is impeding on his success in society. The issue in regard to employment is a private sector issue and an employer should have the right to know whether or not a person they are trying to hire has a prior criminal history.
I guess the next defense we will hear in court is that he committed that rape b/c he couldn't vote for his local representative due to a prior felony conviction. He's been disenfranchised by the system, the reality is that he's been disenfranchised by his own actions. |
Once they've completed their sentence and probation, why not allow for them to ask for their other rights to be restored as well?
Not all convicted felons are repeat offenders and hardened criminals, some just make mistakes and will never offend again. You'd just flog them all for a lifetime rather than allowing them to be productive members of society again. |
Ignorance or neglect "mistake" are not excuses the law will listen too. If you are convicted of a felony by your peers why is it so hard to understand that as part of your punushment you will lose certain rights. No one made you commit the felony. you did that on your own free will. At least we would hope or then it woud be another case. Basically it is the same if you denounce you citizenship you lose your rights also. When you choose to commit a crime of a certain level Felony in this arguement then you decided if you were caught you would lose your rights by your own decisions you made. come on people now we are in the market of making excuses for convicted Felons. It is remarkable how low some will go just to get a vote. |
So, you'd continue to separate them from society, ostracizing them instead of helping them feel and become accepted in society again. A regular font of compassion and kindness you are. |
|
|
|
10/08/2008 02:21:43 PM · #81 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Originally posted by coronamv:
Ignorance or neglect "mistake" are not excuses the law will listen too. If you are convicted of a felony by your peers why is it so hard to understand that as part of your punushment you will lose certain rights. No one made you commit the felony. you did that on your own free will. At least we would hope or then it woud be another case. Basically it is the same if you denounce you citizenship you lose your rights also. When you choose to commit a crime of a certain level Felony in this arguement then you decided if you were caught you would lose your rights by your own decisions you made. come on people now we are in the market of making excuses for convicted Felons. It is remarkable how low some will go just to get a vote. |
So, you'd continue to separate them from society, ostracizing them instead of helping them feel and become accepted in society again. A regular font of compassion and kindness you are. |
Give him some time to make his own mistakes. Making mistakes did wonders for my own sense of compassion. |
|
|
|
10/08/2008 02:32:46 PM · #82 |
| You keep calling crimes they commited a mistake. Yes I would agree with you but it seems you are lowering the act that a felon has committed by calling them anything but what they are Felony level crimes are usually bad for the whole of the country. That is why the punishment includes the lose of certain rights. If you do not want to lose these rights we speak of walk the straight and narrow or don't get caught! I am not the one that put them into the position that landed them in Jail or convicted them of a crime of a certain level. That would be the fault of the person who committed the crime. In other words it is their fault. And no I do not feel compassion for someone who commits a crime and is convicted. |
|
|
|
10/08/2008 02:38:01 PM · #83 |
Originally posted by coronamv:
You keep calling crimes they commited a mistake. Yes I would agree with you but it seems you are lowering the act that a felon has committed by calling them anything but what they are Felony level crimes are usually bad for the whole of the country. That is why the punishment includes the lose of certain rights. If you do not want to lose these rights we speak of walk the straight and narrow or don't get caught! I am not the one that put them into the position that landed them in Jail or convicted them of a crime of a certain level. That would be the fault of the person who committed the crime. In other words it is their fault. And no I do not feel compassion for someone who commits a crime and is convicted. |
... and they've server their time as directed by a judge under the laws provided for whatever crime they committed. Rights should be revoked during time of incarceration and maybe even during their period of parole but once their sentence is complete their rights should be returned.
|
|
|
|
10/08/2008 02:51:36 PM · #84 |
Originally posted by coronamv:
I am not the one that put them into the position that landed them in Jail or convicted them of a crime of a certain level. That would be the fault of the person who committed the crime. In other words it is their fault. And no I do not feel compassion for someone who commits a crime and is convicted. |
I shall work on the premise that you know absolutely nothing about crime and punishment... otherwise your comment would in all likelihood exhibit a bit of compassion.
There exist countless examples where individuals were convicted of crimes that they did not commit, and for the most part, these individuals were either from the fringes of our society or from visible minority groups.
Not everything is cut and dry or black and white... there are varying shades of grey.
Also, judging by your comments I get the very distinct impression that you would have these individuals stripped of their voting rights "Ad vitam aeternam", which does little to ensure that the individual can reintegrate society as a productive member.
Sorry my friend, but your manner of proceeding would only serve to ensure that once defined as a criminal, an individual could never again hope to attain the level of "Honest" citizen.
Ray |
|
|
|
10/08/2008 03:26:40 PM · #85 |
You do need some sympathy and a little understanding of how criminals become what they are.
For example, there are Foster Care Kids who get bounced from home to home, they get abused and beaten, starved exposed to the unthinkable and NEVER get a chance to go to school....forget about graduating. Eventually they age out of the system and inevitably do bad things. At the younger ages we view them as victims with a great deal of sympathy but the minute they hit 17-18 ...they're considered animals. I'm not trying to say they shouldn't be dealt with if the commit crimes but we might be more inclined to help them before things go wrong or certainly before they become completely lost an disenfranchised.
X-Offenders would be far easier to deal with and integrate back into the society, if prisons were treated as meritocracies. Where you enter and start out with nothing and earn privleges as you accomplish, positive milestones. No gym, No TV, No nothing until you start learning to become productive. There is very little sufficient rehab going on these days.
Message edited by author 2008-10-08 15:38:58. |
|
|
|
10/08/2008 03:46:01 PM · #86 |
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
IMO, felons lose rights when they get sent to prison. Voting is a right that is lost when sent to prison. |
Not just your opinion, it's law. And the same law has provisions for the restoration of those privileges. |
|
|
|
10/08/2008 03:57:35 PM · #87 |
Originally posted by RayEthier:
Originally posted by coronamv:
I am not the one that put them into the position that landed them in Jail or convicted them of a crime of a certain level. That would be the fault of the person who committed the crime. In other words it is their fault. And no I do not feel compassion for someone who commits a crime and is convicted. |
I shall work on the premise that you know absolutely nothing about crime and punishment... otherwise your comment would in all likelihood exhibit a bit of compassion. You would be incorrect. Compassion held blindly leads to asumptions like the ones you are making.
There exist countless examples where individuals were convicted of crimes that they did not commit, and for the most part, these individuals were either from the fringes of our society or from visible minority groups. As stated above as I feel you have read and ignored, this would be another arguement on whether or not they got a fair trial.
Not everything is cut and dry or black and white... there are varying shades of grey. Agreed, but we are talking about convicted criminals. Our legal system is designed to let 30 criminals go free before convicting one inocent person. Now does this always work NO. No system is perfect and neither is this one. Working on the premiss that the person in question is guilty of the crime and the punishment strips the individual of these rights I do not see an issue.
Also, judging by your comments I get the very distinct impression that you would have these individuals stripped of their voting rights "Ad vitam aeternam", which does little to ensure that the individual can reintegrate society as a productive member. The 14th amendment provides that this is a state issue and allows for this. So basically either each state can change their position in which some have or it will take a constitutional amendment to change this.
Sorry my friend, but your manner of proceeding would only serve to ensure that once defined as a criminal, an individual could never again hope to attain the level of "Honest" citizen. Ray |
First there is no need to be condensending since we are not friends on any level. That is the nature of the system. Don't commit a crime.
Message edited by author 2008-10-08 15:58:40. |
|
|
|
10/10/2008 11:09:20 AM · #88 |
Originally posted by coronamv:
[quote=RayEthier] [quote=coronamv] I am not the one that put them into the position that landed them in Jail or convicted them of a crime of a certain level. That would be the fault of the person who committed the crime. In other words it is their fault. And no I do not feel compassion for someone who commits a crime and is convicted. |
Originally posted by coronamv:
I shall work on the premise that you know absolutely nothing about crime and punishment... otherwise your comment would in all likelihood exhibit a bit of compassion. [b]You would be incorrect. Compassion held blindly leads to asumptions like the ones you are making.[/b] |
Do enlighten me as to your level of experience in dealing with the criminal element. I happen to have 30+ years in the domain and still have a certain degree of compassion for some of the individuals you seem to summarily dismiss, and for what it's worth, I seriously doubt that any compassion I may exhibit is done "blindly".
Originally posted by coronamv:
There exist countless examples where individuals were convicted of crimes that they did not commit, and for the most part, these individuals were either from the fringes of our society or from visible minority groups. As stated above as I feel you have read and ignored, this would be another arguement on whether or not they got a fair trial. |
...and you would be wrong in your assumption. The question as to whether or not a person got a fair trial can in several instances be attributable to whether or not they had the funds to secure good legal representation... something you do not seem to grasp.
Originally posted by coronamv:
Not everything is cut and dry or black and white... there are varying shades of grey. Agreed, but we are talking about convicted criminals. Our legal system is designed to let 30 criminals go free before convicting one inocent person. Now does this always work NO. No system is perfect and neither is this one. Working on the premiss that the person in question is guilty of the crime and the punishment strips the individual of these rights I do not see an issue. |
Why am I not surprised by your stance in this regard?
Also, judging by your comments I get the very distinct impression that you would have these individuals stripped of their voting rights "Ad vitam aeternam", which does little to ensure that the individual can reintegrate society as a productive member.
Originally posted by coronamv:
The 14th amendment provides that this is a state issue and allows for this. So basically either each state can change their position in which some have or it will take a constitutional amendment to change this.
Sorry my friend, but your manner of proceeding would only serve to ensure that once defined as a criminal, an individual could never again hope to attain the level of "Honest" citizen. Ray |
Originally posted by coronamv:
First there is no need to be condensending since we are not friends on any level. That is the nature of the system. Don't commit a crime. |
If you took the time to re-read my post you would find that there truly is nothing condescending therein. If I wrote; " How can I possibly expect you to understand what condescending means when you can't spell it properly" now that would be condescending, but far be it for me to resort to such tactics.
Have a great day.
Message edited by L2 - Continue here. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/04/2025 08:24:42 AM EDT.
