What is the benefit in denying prisoners the vote?
Or put it another way: What is the harm in allowing it?
I've yet to see a coherent argument for this particular policy, let alone one that justifies throwing out the entire Human Rights Act.
(
wheresthefish Partly filled with wrong, Wed 13 May 2015, 18:31,
Reply)
I don't see any benefit/harm.
I think it is part of the punishment. It is frankly nothing in comparison to being literally incarcerated. It's mainly a symbolic withdrawal of a freedom. On a more practical and pragmatic level, it would massively distort a constituency's size and make up, and people forced into a particular prison can rarely claim to have to been part of the community or have any connection to the constituency in which their prison lies. Why should they therefore have a say in who represents that constituency?
The problem with the HRA, is you can't just throw bits of it out. Ideally we wouldn't throw the entire thing out, just tweak it. But that isn't really how statutes work: it's all or nothing, hence the idea or replacing it with a Bill of Rights.
(
Prufrock Lucifer, son of the morning!, Wed 13 May 2015, 18:47,
Reply)
The distortion can easily be rectified though
by the use of a postal ballot in the prisoner's home constituency. Yes it's more expensive, but in comparison to the cost of locking someone up in the first place it's small beer.
As for it being a part of the punishment, that ultimately boils down to a "We do it like this because we've always done it like this" argument. It's not really an argument based on any reasoning or principle, merely an unwillingness to change. It's not like punishments haven't changed over the years - we used to lock people up in stocks after all.
If the punishment aspect of the disenfranchisement is small in comparison to the deprivation of liberty (and let's face it, it is), then I fail to see why we don't just accept the decision of the European Court of Human Rights and change the punishment accordingly.
(
wheresthefish Partly filled with wrong, Wed 13 May 2015, 19:07,
Reply)
Many prisoners don't have homes.
How do you therefore define their home constituency? Maybe we should just stop locking people up just because we always have done.
(
Prufrock Lucifer, son of the morning!, Wed 13 May 2015, 20:32,
Reply)
This isn't really a problem though
Persons of No Fixed Abode already have a procedure to enrol on the Electoral Register. There's no reason to change that.
As for your final sentence, maybe so and I'd support that. There's plenty of evidence that suggests that locking people up is counterproductive with regard to preventing reoffending. However that's unlikely to be acted upon in the near future due to such ideas being deemed politically unpalateable.
(
wheresthefish Partly filled with wrong, Wed 13 May 2015, 23:34,
Reply)
OK mate.
I'll send Mark Bridger and Ian Huntley round to babysit your daughters next time you fancy a curry. Or maybe just fuck those full life tariffs and move them into the bail hostel in your neighbourhood, rather than their "home constituencies". As long as your delusional ideologies remain intact, that's the main thing. Never mind realities, practicalities and the dark side of human nature. Enjoy your dopiaza.
(
Prufrock Lucifer, son of the morning!, Wed 13 May 2015, 23:52,
Reply)
Are those two locked up for punishment or public protection?
A weak Straw Man argument coupled with an Ad Hominem. I think this conversation has reached its conclusion.
(
wheresthefish Partly filled with wrong, Thu 14 May 2015, 0:24,
Reply)
Niether are in a mental hospital prison, therefore they're in there for punishment.
They will get out if they live long enough. Votes for Broadmoor! is there always a clear dichotomy between protection of the public and punishment? Is rehabilitation always possible? Is the world as black and white as your ideologies?
(
Prufrock Lucifer, son of the morning!, Thu 14 May 2015, 1:44,
Reply)
Why on earth are you advocating their rights so hard though?
Surely being banged up for crimes looses some rights to contribute to society in an election.
You haven't offered any argument other than some pointless 'why can't they have a vote' argument, which seems against a brick wall. They've committed crimes and cost the tax payer shit loads of money prosecuting them and housing them in a prison. They can vote and do normal things like a law abiding citizen of society when they've served their time. Until then they can feel frustrated and fucked off in their cells contributing nothing.
(
Harpago ¯\(°_o)/¯, Thu 14 May 2015, 1:10,
Reply)
here's a thing,
the case before the ECHR in 2009 was actually about prisoners not being able to vote in the European Parliament elections, not in UK elections. European election, European rules, makes sense to me.
Anyway the point about people forfeiting their rights when they commit crimes is really rather sinister. I used to believe that myself, back in the day, but it is vitally important that convicted criminals are still human beings and the law still applies to them. The Tories seem to want to make rights conditional on good behaviour generally, and i find that a deeply disturbing direction to head in.
William Roper: So, now you give the Devil the benefit of law!
Sir Thomas More: Yes! What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?
William Roper: Yes, I'd cut down every law in England to do that!
Sir Thomas More: Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned 'round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man's laws, not God's! And if you cut them down, and you're just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake!
(
Moon Girl Technologies horrendous beanbag, Thu 14 May 2015, 8:39,
Reply)
even if that makes them more likely to do it again?
(
tickle I was away, Thu 14 May 2015, 16:20,
Reply)
they'd probably vote Labour
(
Moon Girl Technologies horrendous beanbag, Wed 13 May 2015, 19:40,
Reply)