corner of hells wrote: » What parties rely on people who sit on their hole all day ?
pgj2015 wrote: » sinn fein?
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.
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.
CorkBlackbird wrote: » Remove the vote for IRA men? Our countries best and most famous politicians were IRA men!
[Deleted User] wrote: » Mate the IRA won our freedom in the 1st place
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:)
pgj2015 wrote: » would you be happy with larry murphy voting?
Ken. wrote: » Yes. He served his time for the crime he was convicted of.
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.
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.
pgj2015 wrote: » well there wouldn't be a problem if we only had 1 serious criminal in the country.
iamstop wrote: » 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.
Berties_Horse wrote: » He should of paid a little more attention in school.
pgj2015 wrote: » I meant to write lose when I made the thread but somehow wrote loose by mistake, I am well aware of the difference, but some people on here like to make a big deal of such issues. A far fetched scenario here but just say you are on a ship, it crashes on a desert island, 40 people on the boat. 25 ex cons, (serious crimes) 15 law abiding citizens. there is a 1 man already living on the island. one day the native man says he has come up with an idea on how to run the island. all the issues regarding running the island will be decided by voting. either all 41 people get 1 vote each or just the law abiding people get a vote, and he wants you to decide. what is your choice?
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.
iamstop wrote: » Also, you did it twice! Once in the title and once here. Okay, end of.
