Idiots and insane people can't vote in Kentucky

[devildog 0]

Quote

http://www.lrc.state.ky.us/legresou/constitu/145.htm

But don't forget, this is the same state that has the Creationist Museum.

That may be... but they didn't vote for our current POTUS either so it kind of evens out

You stop breathing for a few minutes and everyone jumps to conclusions.

[Andrewwhyte 1]

Quote

I wasn't aware, he was found 'not guilty'. Was that a 'not guilty by reason of insanity'?



Chuck

Yes. Which brings us back to the original issue. He is not a criminal. He was judged insane. He is now (perhaps in the process of) being judged no longer insane.
Should he enjoy the franchise. I would say yes BUT the question at hand is: should he have enjoyed the franchise whilst judged insane?
I think not. Rocket thinks so. It is not an easy question.

[masterrig 1]

Quote

Quote

I wasn't aware, he was found 'not guilty'. Was that a 'not guilty by reason of insanity'?



Chuck

Yes. Which brings us back to the original issue. He is not a criminal. He was judged insane. He is now (perhaps in the process of) being judged no longer insane.
Should he enjoy the franchise. I would say yes BUT the question at hand is: should he have enjoyed the franchise whilst judged insane?
I think not. Rocket thinks so. It is not an easy question.

Yes, that is a tough decision to make. Hmmmm...


Chuck

[lawrocket 3]

Reasonable minds can differ. I just tend to lean more towards suffrage in general than away from it. From a philosophical standpoint there is no right or wrong answer.

[Beer]

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[tkhayes 144]

the only 'restriction' that should allow you to vote is that you are an American citizen and perhaps age of majority or whatever 18 year old as it is today. period. that is it. It should be a federal law.

The states should have NO SAY whatsoever in restricting their voting populations. felons, criminally insane, insane, mentally or physically handicapped, whatever. These should not be factors nor should they matter.

Even a felon should have the right to choose the leaders that eventually effect the punishment they may or might receive.

It is simply corrupt to restrict the voting population and voting is a basis for the democracy we live in. To restrict it in any way is a disgrace and a shame and a distortion of the free will of the people.

[popsjumper 2]

Damn, TK. As radical and as hard-headed as you are, I have to agree with you on this one.


As an aside, hell, what bozo are you going to vote for that is NOT insane so why shouldn't the insane be able to vote for them just like we unofficial nutjobs do?

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

the only 'restriction' that should allow you to vote is that you are an American citizen and perhaps age of majority or whatever 18 year old as it is today. period. that is it. It should be a federal law.

The states should have NO SAY whatsoever in restricting their voting populations. felons, criminally insane, insane, mentally or physically handicapped, whatever. These should not be factors nor should they matter.

Even a felon should have the right to choose the leaders that eventually effect the punishment they may or might receive.

It is simply corrupt to restrict the voting population and voting is a basis for the democracy we live in. To restrict it in any way is a disgrace and a shame and a distortion of the free will of the people.

So if a criminally organized street gang full of felons concentrated their efforts to get someone elected that would pass laws that favor them or elect a Sheriff who would look the other way while crimes are being commited, you would be OK with that?

[Andy9o8 0]

Quote

Quote

the only 'restriction' that should allow you to vote is that you are an American citizen and perhaps age of majority or whatever 18 year old as it is today. period. that is it. It should be a federal law.

The states should have NO SAY whatsoever in restricting their voting populations. felons, criminally insane, insane, mentally or physically handicapped, whatever. These should not be factors nor should they matter.

Even a felon should have the right to choose the leaders that eventually effect the punishment they may or might receive.

It is simply corrupt to restrict the voting population and voting is a basis for the democracy we live in. To restrict it in any way is a disgrace and a shame and a distortion of the free will of the people.

So if a criminally organized street gang full of felons concentrated their efforts to get someone elected that would pass laws that favor them or elect a Sheriff who would look the other way while crimes are being commited, you would be OK with that?

You act like that's not already done.

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

the only 'restriction' that should allow you to vote is that you are an American citizen and perhaps age of majority or whatever 18 year old as it is today. period. that is it. It should be a federal law.

The states should have NO SAY whatsoever in restricting their voting populations. felons, criminally insane, insane, mentally or physically handicapped, whatever. These should not be factors nor should they matter.

Even a felon should have the right to choose the leaders that eventually effect the punishment they may or might receive.

It is simply corrupt to restrict the voting population and voting is a basis for the democracy we live in. To restrict it in any way is a disgrace and a shame and a distortion of the free will of the people.

So if a criminally organized street gang full of felons concentrated their efforts to get someone elected that would pass laws that favor them or elect a Sheriff who would look the other way while crimes are being commited, you would be OK with that?

You act like that's not already done.

I do realize that however, I don't think we should make it even easier.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

the only 'restriction' that should allow you to vote is that you are an American citizen and perhaps age of majority or whatever 18 year old as it is today. period. that is it. It should be a federal law.

The states should have NO SAY whatsoever in restricting their voting populations. felons, criminally insane, insane, mentally or physically handicapped, whatever. These should not be factors nor should they matter.

Even a felon should have the right to choose the leaders that eventually effect the punishment they may or might receive.

It is simply corrupt to restrict the voting population and voting is a basis for the democracy we live in. To restrict it in any way is a disgrace and a shame and a distortion of the free will of the people.

So if a criminally organized street gang full of felons concentrated their efforts to get someone elected that would pass laws that favor them or elect a Sheriff who would look the other way while crimes are being commited, you would be OK with that?

You act like that's not already done.

"So look for the union label...."

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

the only 'restriction' that should allow you to vote is that you are an American citizen and perhaps age of majority or whatever 18 year old as it is today. period. that is it. It should be a federal law.

The states should have NO SAY whatsoever in restricting their voting populations. felons, criminally insane, insane, mentally or physically handicapped, whatever. These should not be factors nor should they matter.

Even a felon should have the right to choose the leaders that eventually effect the punishment they may or might receive.

It is simply corrupt to restrict the voting population and voting is a basis for the democracy we live in. To restrict it in any way is a disgrace and a shame and a distortion of the free will of the people.

So if a criminally organized street gang full of felons concentrated their efforts to get someone elected that would pass laws that favor them or elect a Sheriff who would look the other way while crimes are being commited, you would be OK with that?

You act like that's not already done.

"So look for the union label...."

[Andy9o8 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

the only 'restriction' that should allow you to vote is that you are an American citizen and perhaps age of majority or whatever 18 year old as it is today. period. that is it. It should be a federal law.

The states should have NO SAY whatsoever in restricting their voting populations. felons, criminally insane, insane, mentally or physically handicapped, whatever. These should not be factors nor should they matter.

Even a felon should have the right to choose the leaders that eventually effect the punishment they may or might receive.

It is simply corrupt to restrict the voting population and voting is a basis for the democracy we live in. To restrict it in any way is a disgrace and a shame and a distortion of the free will of the people.

So if a criminally organized street gang full of felons concentrated their efforts to get someone elected that would pass laws that favor them or elect a Sheriff who would look the other way while crimes are being commited, you would be OK with that?

You act like that's not already done.

I do realize that however, I don't think we should make it even easier.

Then it's class warfare, because those at the top of the heap of the criminal enterprises get to vote-in their enablers, but the common foot-sloggers lose their right to do so.
Equal rights for equal criminality, I say!

[pirana 0]

Quote

the only 'restriction' that should allow you to vote is that you are an American citizen and perhaps age of majority or whatever 18 year old as it is today. period. that is it. It should be a federal law.

The states should have NO SAY whatsoever in restricting their voting populations. felons, criminally insane, insane, mentally or physically handicapped, whatever. These should not be factors nor should they matter.

Even a felon should have the right to choose the leaders that eventually effect the punishment they may or might receive.

It is simply corrupt to restrict the voting population and voting is a basis for the democracy we live in. To restrict it in any way is a disgrace and a shame and a distortion of the free will of the people.

I agree. Default to full suffrage. I can't see it causing any harm. It appears as more of a punishment than a protection of our election process.

Also, hard to imagine them voting as a block, Unless someone goes after the criminal vote, or the insane vote, or the criminally insane vote - it won't matter much.

Not allowing certain people to vote is only a rung down from jailing them (or labeling them) so that they can not vote.

" . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

[tkhayes 144]

Quote

So if a criminally organized street gang full of felons concentrated their efforts to get someone elected....

Define "criminally organized street gang". Some people think the Occupy movement is about the criminally organized gang that is doing exactly what you seem to think is a bad idea.

One man's street gang is another man's social club.

Name a 'street gang' that is large enough to sway a vote larger than a local or county government seat.

If the 'street gang' is comprised of citizens, then yes, they have the right to vote. period.

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Quote

So if a criminally organized street gang full of felons concentrated their efforts to get someone elected....

Define "criminally organized street gang". Some people think the Occupy movement is about the criminally organized gang that is doing exactly what you seem to think is a bad idea.

One man's street gang is another man's social club.

Name a 'street gang' that is large enough to sway a vote larger than a local or county government seat.

If the 'street gang' is comprised of citizens, then yes, they have the right to vote. period.

I hadn't read where the Occupy Movement consists mainly of felons. Please provide that information.

We do know that many of them are felons but I'd hardly consider them a criminally organized group of felons as you seem to think they are.

[tkhayes 144]

Quote

I hadn't read where the Occupy Movement consists mainly of felons.

I wasn't stating facts, I was stating "Some people think...." as an example just like you were not stating facts, you were stating a somewhat plausible scenario.

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Quote

I hadn't read where the Occupy Movement consists mainly of felons.

I wasn't stating facts, I was stating "Some people think...." as an example just like you were not stating facts, you were stating a somewhat plausible scenario.

Uh, huh...and your point was, again?

If someone has been convicted of a felony, I don't think their right to vote should be taken away permanently. I do think there should be some type of means test such as a certain amount of public service that a felon can perform if they are interested in having their rights restored. I am NOT for allowing some punk who's only goal is to return to a life of crime, to have their voting rights restored.

I do think that in many ways our system makes it too difficult for the person who simply made a mistake due to drug use, immaturity or a desperate situation, to reintergrate back into society. I think too often we create no other choice but for a felon to continue a life of crime after release from incarceration.

[tkhayes 144]

and my point is.... I disagree with you.

[devildog 0]

Quote

the only 'restriction' that should allow you to vote is that you are an American citizen and perhaps age of majority or whatever 18 year old as it is today. period. that is it. It should be a federal law.

The states should have NO SAY whatsoever in restricting their voting populations. felons, criminally insane, insane, mentally or physically handicapped, whatever. These should not be factors nor should they matter.

Even a felon should have the right to choose the leaders that eventually effect the punishment they may or might receive.

It is simply corrupt to restrict the voting population and voting is a basis for the democracy we live in. To restrict it in any way is a disgrace and a shame and a distortion of the free will of the people.

No way. Why should someone who, say, thought it was a good idea to rape a bunch of kids have any say whatsoever in running the country and making decisions that affect my life? They obviously can't show any decent judgement in their own little world, and now you want to have them have the same sway as a law abiding citizen?

Likewise, while I'm sympathetic to the mentally ill, do you really want someone who thinks they are a fire engine or the king of Antarctica having the same pull as someone whose brain is functioning properly? At the very least, if they can't take care of themselves to any degree, why should their vote even matter? They can't make an informed, thoughtful decision, one way or the other.

There's far more at stake than just being able to check a box.

You stop breathing for a few minutes and everyone jumps to conclusions.

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

and my point is.... I disagree with you.

I'm sure you think that now but if the law was changed and you saw the effects of what you propose, I have no doubt you would be back on here ranting about all the criminal politicians being elected by felons.

Do you think convicted felons should be allowed to become law enforcement officers, too? How about judges, doctors, teachers, school bus drivers etc. OK with all that?

[wolfriverjoe 1,365]

Quote

Quote

So if a criminally organized street gang full of felons concentrated their efforts to get someone elected....

Define "criminally organized street gang". Some people think the Occupy movement is about the criminally organized gang that is doing exactly what you seem to think is a bad idea.

One man's street gang is another man's social club.

Name a 'street gang' that is large enough to sway a vote larger than a local or county government seat.

If the 'street gang' is comprised of citizens, then yes, they have the right to vote. period.

Chicago.

Admittedly, it is a local or county government seat.
But it's a big city/county.

And while it is far, far better than it has been in the past, it's still pretty corrupt.

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[jakee 1,271]

Quote

Quote

and my point is.... I disagree with you.

I'm sure you think that now but if the law was changed and you saw the effects of what you propose, I have no doubt you would be back on here ranting about all the criminal politicians being elected by felons.

I'm sure you think that now but if the law was changed and you saw the effects of what he proposes, you wouldn't notice a blind bit of difference.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[tkhayes 144]

there are plenty of places that have corrupt governments where felons cannot vote. I put it to you that there is little, if any statistical correlation or causation to suggest that felons voting would in ANY WAY change that.

If you are American, you already earned the right to vote. The right to vote should be absolute. No one and no government should be able or allowed to take that away from you, period. This is my belief and it is the cornerstone of democracy.

If you allow rules to come into play, then you also allow those 'rules' to be expanded and perhaps to no end - allowing the population that is able to vote to itself become a 'popular vote'.

not my kind of democracy. and the number of felons, even if they all unionized for one candidate, would hardly make a difference,

And the impossibility of ALL felons deciding to vote for one candidate (or even being able to due to geography) makes this pretty much a moot point. You are trying to fix a problem that does not exist, much like all the 'alleged voter fraud' reasons of late for tightening the rules.

There is no evidence of widespread voter fraud yet we pass legislation to restrict it just in case there is.

I think we have bigger fish to fry.

And no, i would not be coming back crying about all the crooked politicians - as I am already doing that today - i.e. there would be no change likely in my stance, again reinforcing my point.

[tkhayes 144]

Quote

Do you think convicted felons should be allowed to become law enforcement officers, too

different issue, completely and not related to the thread.

[tkhayes 144]

Quote

And while it is far, far better than it has been in the past, it's still pretty corrupt.

It may very well be, but if the people of Chicago wanted to change that - they easily could, just by turning up to vote.

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2011-02-22/news/ct-met-voting-0223-20110222_1_voter-turnout-high-turnout-polling

Maybe knowing that felons and 'insane people' were able to vote would encourage more people to come out a vote to 'offset' the perception that is portrayed by felons voting.

I am sure that the numbers of republicans, democrats, gays, christians, lesbians, clergymen, janitors, laborers, socialists and such is probably about the same demographic for felons as regular 'non-felon' citizens.