should convicts of serious crimes lose their vote?

pgj2015

Im not sure if these people would vote much anyway but do you think people who have committed serious crimes like rape, murder, armed robbery etc loose their right to vote in elections, referendums?

I vote that they should lose their vote. who wants people like that deciding who runs the country or what changes are made to our constitution.

JohnnyFlash

pgj2015 wrote: »

Im not sure if these people would vote much anyway but do you think people who have committed serious crimes like rape, murder, armed robbery etc loose their right to vote in elections, referendums?

I vote that they should loose their vote. who wants people like that deciding who runs the country or what changes are made to our constitution.

No.

Journal.ie and Twitter commentators though? Hmmm....

touts

They should lose their vote for the period of their conviction. E.g. if a 10 year sentence and they only serve two or three years before getting out on early release as under the current system they still cannot vote until the full sentence is up.

But no doubt the Irish Council for Criminal Liberties and other criminal advocacy groups will throw a tantrum on Morning Ireland and Mountjoy will probably be made a standalone constituency with their own TDs and Senators.

Ten of Swords

No.

What you are suggesting is to strip them of their rights as citizens and effectively make them property of the state for the duration of their conviction

pgj2015

Ten of Swords wrote: »

No.

What you are suggesting is to strip them of their rights as citizens and effectively make them property of the state for the duration of their conviction

I actually feel they should never have the right to vote again, who wants some member of the IRA, murderer, rapist deciding who runs our country? I think that should be left to people who behave themselves and who aren't scum bags basically.

pgj2015

pgj2015 wrote: »

I actually feel they should never have the right to vote again, who wants some member of the IRA, murderer, rapist deciding who runs our country? I think that should be left to people who behave themselves and who aren't scum bags basically.

Mate the IRA won our freedom in the 1st place

ongarite

No.

Its the start of a slippery slope to the US system then where you can "help" your re-election chances by excluding everyone who has had a criminal conviction no matter how minor.

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

Mate the IRA won our freedom in the 1st place

Not really. Which IRA? Had the IRA of the time continued their aims, they'd have seen us fight for the north, lose, and only gain independence much later in the period. In any case, considering the socialist aspect of the IRA and their links with Stalinist ideology, we would have been seeing a more communist progression from independence. Hardly a bastion for peoples freedoms.

Our freedoms come from many sources (thankfully), especially as Church & State was gradually eroded, and Irish people could gain real freedom from religious nonsense.

Not seeking to derail the thread, but I don't get this whitewashing of the IRA and elevating them beyond the role they served in our history.

touts

touts wrote: »

They should lose their vote for the period of their conviction. E.g. if a 10 year sentence and they only serve two or three years before getting out on early release as under the current system they still cannot vote until the full sentence is up.

But no doubt the Irish Council for Criminal Liberties and other criminal advocacy groups will throw a tantrum on Morning Ireland and Mountjoy will probably be made a standalone constituency with their own TDs and Senators.

Agreed. There should be real punishments to reinforce the belief that what they did has consequence. Considering the farce that is the revolving door policy of prisons and sentencing, there should be other punishments involved, which show that they've chosen to live outside of acceptable norms. And I don't think losing their right to vote for the period of their incarceration would be so terrible for most of them. It's not as if Ireland imprisons Political activists for opposing the government.

Ten of Swords wrote:

No.

What you are suggesting is to strip them of their rights as citizens and effectively make them property of the state for the duration of their conviction

How so? They would still have their other rights as citizens.

[Deleted User]

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Not really. Which IRA? Had the IRA of the time continued their aims, they'd have seen us fight for the north, lose, and only gain independence much later in the period. In any case, considering the socialist aspect of the IRA and their links with Stalinist ideology, we would have been seeing a more communist progression from independence. Hardly a bastion for peoples freedoms.

Our freedoms come from many sources (thankfully), especially as Church & State was gradually eroded, and Irish people could gain real freedom from religious nonsense.

Not seeking to derail the thread, but I don't get this whitewashing of the IRA and elevating them beyond the role they served in our history.

Freedom from.english rule....war of independance?


Kinda ironic lectuting to others,when you seem unaware of this?

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

Freedom from.english rule....war of independance?


Kinda ironic lectuting to others,when you seem unaware of this?

Unaware of what? Your objection isn't exactly clear. In fact, I'm not even sure what you are objecting to in my post.

And disagreeing with you, is lecturing? :rolleyes:

[Deleted User]

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Unaware of what? Your objection isn't exactly clear. In fact, I'm not even sure what you are objecting to in my post.

And disagreeing with you, is lecturing? :rolleyes:

Mate either you think the ira won war of independance or your dont

I dont really see grounds for disagreement here tbh?

Quite what you feel rolleyes add to ignoring historical realities is beyond me

banie01

Deleted User wrote: »

How so? They would still have their other rights as citizens.

I'd posit that amongst the constitutionally protected rights of a citizen is their right to actively participate in the political discourse and choice of government via the exercising of their vote.

Rights as a citizen are not levels or XP, its pretty much an all or nothing proposition.

Citizens all have equal rights, making some more equal than others?

Well, I think that's a little too close to Orwell.

In theory I wouldn't be against them losing their right to vote for the duration of the sentence but in reality it's a slippery slope so it's a no from me.

pgj2015

Deleted User wrote: »

In theory I wouldn't be against them losing their right to vote for the duration of the sentence but in reality it's a slippery slope so it's a no from me.

You sure? what if there was a sizeable number of convicts who decided to vote for some nut job racist right wing party, then they get into power. or if there was a vote in a referendum that no one could serve more than 20 years in jail no matter the crime (like in norway) where that guy killed 60 kids but can not serve more than 20 years in jail. would you be ok with these people deciding issues like that?

pgj2015

Deleted User wrote: »

Mate either you think the ira won war of independance or your dont

I dont really see grounds for disagreement here tbh?

Quite what you feel rolleyes add to ignoring historical realities is beyond me

Just to clear this up, I was talking about IRA members from the 70's to the dissident groups we have now, not the guys back in 100 years ago.

pgj2015

pgj2015 wrote: »

You sure? what if there was a sizeable number of convicts who decided to vote for some nut job racist right wing party, then they get into power. or if there was a vote in a referendum that no one could serve more than 20 years in jail no matter the crime (like in norway) where that guy killed 60 kids but can not serve more than 20 years in jail. would you be ok with these people deciding issues like that?

You can throw whatever scenario you want in front of me, it's still a no.

The day the prison population can decide such a vote is the day democracy is long dead.

We have plenty of law abiding citizens that would love a nut job racist right wing party in power but Ireland has resoundingly rejected such people, aside from the undemocratic Seanad.

Zebra3

How about we stop convicted criminals from holding seats in the Oireachtas?

biko

That's not very inclusive of you OP.

Yup absolutely. I'd remove the vote from anyone who is a repeat offender as well even if it's only minor things. I'd also remove it from anyone who's long term unemployed/on social welfare.

Maybe bring in a system of you have to contribute x before you can vote or receive state support be that through service to the state (guard, army, nurse, doc etc) or through x amount of years of tax/prsi payments. Would kill all those parties that rely on people who sit on their hole with their handout who've never worked a day in their life.

In the event of long term illness previous contributions will be taken into account.

Dravokivich

pgj2015 wrote: »

Im not sure if these people would vote much anyway but do you think people who have committed serious crimes like rape, murder, armed robbery etc loose their right to vote in elections, referendums?

I vote that they should lose their vote. who wants people like that deciding who runs the country or what changes are made to our constitution.

Before thinking they should lose their vote. How many actually use it? How much of a difference would occur if that vote was then to be deducted?

Chances are not a lot and slim.

So why go through all this extra work for minimal gains?

Ten of Swords

Deleted User wrote: »

Maybe bring in a system of you have to contribute x before you can vote or receive state support be that through service to the state (guard, army, nurse, doc etc) or through x amount of years of tax/prsi payments

Ken.

Yes. If you can't play by the rules you don't get to be a part of making the rules.

Dravokivich

Ten of Swords wrote: »

No.

What you are suggesting is to strip them of their rights as citizens and effectively make them property of the state for the duration of their conviction

We're already property of the state.

Ten of Swords

Ten of Swords wrote: »

That's actually what I was thinking as I typed

CrankyHaus

The point of prison is that the convict repays their debt to society.
Removing their vote on release will just enhance feelings of alienation from the mainstream and increase the risk of recidivism.
What harm has ever been caused by ex-convicts voting? Have they ever formed a pro-convict party to legalise serious crimes? Would many of them even be bothered voting?

The proposal is a solution to a problem that doesn't exist, which would itself create worse problems.

Ken.

I thought the op meant while in jail. That I agree with. Afterwards they should be allowed.

Cienciano

I broke the speed limit yesterday so I'm not actually allowed to vote on this thread

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

Mate either you think the ira won war of independance or your dont

I dont really see grounds for disagreement here tbh?

Quite what you feel rolleyes add to ignoring historical realities is beyond me

Forget it. You're obviously unwilling to think about what I wrote.

corner of hells

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Yup absolutely. I'd remove the vote from anyone who is a repeat offender as well even if it's only minor things. I'd also remove it from anyone who's long term unemployed/on social welfare.

Maybe bring in a system of you have to contribute x before you can vote or receive state support be that through service to the state (guard, army, nurse, doc etc) or through x amount of years of tax/prsi payments. Would kill all those parties that rely on people who sit on their hole with their handout who've never worked a day in their life.

In the event of long term illness previous contributions will be taken into account.

What parties rely on people who sit on their hole all day ?

corner of hells

Cienciano wrote: »

I broke the speed limit yesterday so I'm not actually allowed to vote on this thread

If you drive in reverse at the same speed for an hour, all will be forgiven .

pgj2015

corner of hells wrote: »

What parties rely on people who sit on their hole all day ?

sinn fein?

corner of hells

pgj2015 wrote: »

sinn fein?

Willya feckin hold on , I'm still getting the popcorn ready.

pjproby

Used extensively in the United States where, as you might imagine, it affects the black community. Trump said recently that if people found it easy to vote the Republicans would never get elected. if used here it would affect communities who are already deprived. United States is hardly a model to aspire to.

end of the road

touts wrote: »

They should lose their vote for the period of their conviction. E.g. if a 10 year sentence and they only serve two or three years before getting out on early release as under the current system they still cannot vote until the full sentence is up.

But no doubt the Irish Council for Criminal Liberties and other criminal advocacy groups will throw a tantrum on Morning Ireland and Mountjoy will probably be made a standalone constituency with their own TDs and Senators.

you mean the irish council for civil liberties, and other liberty advocacy groups would raise legitimate concerns over such a proposal?

not seeing the problem with that tbh.

pgj2015

touts wrote: »

They should lose their vote for the period of their conviction. E.g. if a 10 year sentence and they only serve two or three years before getting out on early release as under the current system they still cannot vote until the full sentence is up.

But no doubt the Irish Council for Criminal Liberties and other criminal advocacy groups will throw a tantrum on Morning Ireland and Mountjoy will probably be made a standalone constituency with their own TDs and Senators.

That gave me a good laugh.

Zebra3

pgj2015 wrote: »

sinn fein?

Source?

CorkBlackbird

Remove the vote for IRA men?

Our countries best and most famous politicians were IRA men!

corner of hells

CorkBlackbird wrote: »

Remove the vote for IRA men?

Our countries best and most famous politicians were IRA men!

Except Gerry , El Beardo was never in the 'RA.

Rodney Bathgate

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Mate the IRA won our freedom in the 1st place

Dude, I’ve read some tripe on here but this takes the biscuit.

freshpopcorn

No, however I'd like there to be a little test before voting to see do you know what you are voting for and if you fail.You loose your vote.

earlytobed

Surely if you do your time, you should be allowed to participate fully in society.

Prison is a massive loss of liberty, we should have a sense of this with the lockdown, let alone crapping in a bucket as some prisoners still have to do.

And the word is LOSE their vote:)

pgj2015

earlytobed wrote: »

Surely if you do your time, you should be allowed to participate fully in society.

Prison is a massive loss of liberty, we should have a sense of this with the lockdown, let alone crapping in a bucket as some prisoners still have to do.

And the word is LOSE their vote:)

would you be happy with larry murphy voting?

Ken.

pgj2015 wrote: »

would you be happy with larry murphy voting?

Yes. He served his time for the crime he was convicted of.

pgj2015

Ken. wrote: »

Yes. He served his time for the crime he was convicted of.

There was an article I saw in the last few months about Larry, a criminologist or psychologist wrote it, that someone like him is still a threat until the day he dies, that he will still want to kill. Not the kind of person I want deciding who runs the country or what laws to change.

Ken.

pgj2015 wrote: »

There was an article I saw in the last few months about Larry, a criminologist or psychologist wrote it, that someone like him is still a threat until the day he dies, that he will still want to kill. Not the kind of person I want deciding who runs the country or what laws to change.

They can say what they like for as long as they like. He done the time for his crime so is a free man.

If you go down the road of disallowing people we don't like not being allowed to vote it wouldn't be long before voting was stopped all together.

Also, at the end of the day Larry Murphy(to use your example) has one vote. If I remember correctly if he still lived where he is from he'd be in the wicklow constituency. No election there since his release has come down to a single vote.

pgj2015

Ken. wrote: »

They can say what they like for as long as they like. He done the time for his crime so is a free man.

If you go down the road of disallowing people we don't like not being allowed to vote it wouldn't be long before voting was stopped all together.

Also, at the end of the day Larry Murphy(to use your example) has one vote. If I remember correctly if he still lived where he is from he'd be in the wicklow constituency. No election there since his release has come down to a single vote.

well there wouldnt be a problem if we only had 1 serious criminal in the country.

Ken.

pgj2015 wrote: »

well there wouldn't be a problem if we only had 1 serious criminal in the country.

I don't get your point. Arguably there is probably more people who haven't been caught than have been caught,convicted,served and been released.

I'd say the person caught,convicted,released has more rights than the person not caught yet.

earlytobed

pgj2015 wrote: »

would you be happy with larry murphy voting?

Yes, I'd be more worried about him re-offending

clashburke

pgj2015 wrote: »

There was an article I saw in the last few months about Larry, a criminologist or psychologist wrote it, that someone like him is still a threat until the day he dies, that he will still want to kill. Not the kind of person I want deciding who runs the country or what laws to change.

Probably be better trying to chance the law to keep people like that in prison than taking away their vote?


Everyone should be entitled to vote. Taking away criminals rights after release, wouldn't affect an election, there not enough of them in Ireland to be a major grouping anyway

iamstop

Native English speakers who use 'loose' when 'lose' is correct should lose their citizenship. I'm not using any terms loosely. These people are losers. Their grasp on basic grammar and spelling is pretty loose. I'm about to lose all hope for them.