Scotto am nosy.

[scottobear]

[Poll #9137]

In Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Virginia, Iowa, Kentucky, Nevada, New Mexico, and Wyoming, once you've been convicted of a felony, you've lost the right to vote -- for life. Delaware was on that list up until June, when they restored voting rights to all felons (other than murderers, sex offenders and those convicted of felony bribery) five years after the completion of their sentences. Massachusetts voters, on the other hand, will soon be voting on a bill that would take away the voting right of convicted felons.

In all, forty-six states plus the District of Columbia restrict the voting rights of felons in some manner.

The actual logic of taking away these voting rights is elusive: Keeping a child molester away from children after his sentence is complete makes sense. Not allowing an embezzler to work in a bank is logical. Taking away a murderer's voting rights... well, I'm not sure what a murderer is doing released from prison in the first place, but that's neither here nor there.

And of course, this being the United States, we can't escape the racial angle: This year, one out of every eight Black men of voting age -- 1.4 million in all -- will be unable to vote. In Florida and Alabama, the figure is closer to one-third. Jesse Jackson refers to disenfranchisement as "taxation without representation", and says it goes against what the civil rights movement stood for.

Comments

[artemii.livejournal.com]

Massachusetts voters, on the other hand, will soon be voting on a bill that would take away the voting right of convicted felons.

actually, that was last year, and it passed. it was only for certain state offices, so they have to have special ballots now. it was the latest (and last, since he was made ambassador to canada by bush) ploy by then-governor cellucci to punish them for voting against him. amongst his previous ploys, he'd made political materials contraband.

Re:

[scottobear.livejournal.com]

Very interesting! sorry I'm behind the times there. :) I saw it and figured you'd be voting on it tomorrow.

[sherahi.livejournal.com]

Well, you covered everything I wanted to say. Even the racial angle.

Yah, Who cares about this voting stuff. I'm more concerned about limiting their ability to own weapons and such....hell, everyone knows you can just go to a gun fair and buy anything you want right there and then, no checks, no names, cash accepted. Who needs the street when things like that are 'legal'.

Re:

[scottobear.livejournal.com]

Hmm... I didn't know that! I'll have to look into that, next gun fair that comes by, just to see!

Re:

[sherahi.livejournal.com]

Not all states have waiting periods or background checks. Havent you seen any of the news reports where they send 14 year olds in to buy a gun, and they do? Shotguns and handguns. Then the news people go in and confront and the gun seller flips out on them?

Very entertaining. Popular after every school shooting. I think I've seen almost a dozen videotaped shows like that. Ridiculous. Selling at a 'gun show' should be outlawed. People who sell them out of the back of their car could care less about any laws that happen to exist. They just wanna make a buck.

Re:

[scottobear.livejournal.com]

I was totally unaware of that! How'd I miss it?

Re:

[sherahi.livejournal.com]

Wow, I dunno. There were a BUNCH that came out right after the Columbine shooting, and since then about one a year. Where they send in a minor (who does look like a minor) with cash to go buy some guns. And I don't remember them ever not being successful. I also don't remember what states those reports were done in. Gosh, I remember one the kid walked out with so many guns he couldn't carry them. Several shot guns and like three or four handguns. NO SHIT. It was fricking insane.

They also look at how super super easy it is to get a 'dealer' license and that there is no control on who could get one. Convicted felons have gotten dealor licenses. And then they cross statelines to sell at the gunshows and such. It is sad.

Did you see the dateline episode like last week or the week before on Ecstacy? It was GREAT.

Basically it focused on a group of (college) students who were addicts and were dumb enough to videotape all their antics. And BIG indulgent antics. Two of them, who had chemistry backgrounds, decide to go into business for themselves, and got info off the internet on how to do so, could buy books on how to make it, what they would need, etc. Apparently there was/is a webside called the 'hive' with an expert 'strike' who gave advice on how to make E, where to get the chemicals and how to go undetected. Its also recommended that you can get many of these chemicals without probelms from a certain company (something like 'scientific american chemicals', I forget the exact title.) But he recommended a specific company.

WELL.

The kids get busted, and that is how they found the videotape which they use in this report to show the 'usual effects' and antics of addicts and such. The kids were just....pathetic. That's all I'll say about that. And they had TONS of diaries and video to convict all of them of something.

But then dateline decides 'why are all these E drug recipes and such available? Let's find strike.' Well with VERY little work they do. The book on how to make E is published by some company 'panda', and that company is registered as owned by someone who happens to be the owner of the scientific america (whatever,) chemical company. They go to interview this guy, and he happens to have a stuffed bumblebee on his computer monitor. (Ie: get it, 'hive' ...? The website is full of bee images.)

He basically denies everything at first (he appears high during this interview, or extremely nervous, i mean-- stupidly, extremely high and nervous, he was acting BIZARRE through the WHOLE time they interviewed him.) But as it goes on, he finally comes out and says that yes, he's strike, yes, he was arrested for dealing and making E before, and now he had a license for this chemical company-- but he was straight and couldn't control that people still posted on the hive. But that he didn't. Dateline however traced his account info or something and showed that yes, he had posted within a month of being interviewed, when he claimed it was 'long long ago', like several years or something.

ANYHOW, since they, the law is using all sorts of loops in the law to try and put him in jail (now that he admitted he wrote the E recipe book basically,) in every E case where they find his book. Ha. Huge idiot.

Oh by the way, you know when he wrote that book? When he was in jail serving his original sentences. He finally admits that too. He says that he has used all his profits to put his two sisters through college. Its obvious he is just a very very very sad and unhappy and messed up guy. But...a complete idiot.

I guess just using this to illustrate many felons go right back to the fields they committed the original crimes in. Just put a different twist on it SOMEtimes. So with people who have jobs in 'dangerous' positions (security, etc.,) background checks are a must.

Re:

[scottobear.livejournal.com]

thanks for all the info! :)

I rarely watch tv news anymore...Ineed to find some non-sensationalist/trustworthy show that I can tune into!

Re:

[sherahi.livejournal.com]

I dunno if dateline or whoever are really trustworthy, but when they have some obvious stuff on video, it can be of interest to me. The recent E story was a GOOD one. That chemical company owner was a freak. In a sad way, but still, a freak.

I feel...

[sweetalyssm.livejournal.com]

Once they have paid their debt to society, why punish them further by removing their right to vote? I can understand the prohibition for them not have guns and stuff, but voting? What harm would they do by voting?

Re: I feel...

[scottobear.livejournal.com]

I agree... I feel that voting is a right, not a privilege, too. I do feel that voting should probaby be withheld during imprisonment, though, like many other rights get suspended.. but for other reasons...too easy to lobby and 'buy' votes in prison, I think.