Oh, Canada

[Guest CWMwasmurdered]

I have a problem with murderers and rapists voting, but I don't really mind the rest voting.

 

Though honestly, I'd probably feel differently if they were all voting Conservative (not that I support the Liberals either).

[bob_barron 0]

What about attempted murderers?

[Slayer 0]

They get attempted votes

[Guest CWMwasmurdered]

What about attempted murderers?

 

 

If they're too lazy to plan out a successful murder, then they aren't going to bother to vote.

[Red Hot Thumbtack In The Eye 0]

Criminals give up their right to vote once they've committed their crime(in an ideal, intelligent system of course...). If they can't live within the rules of their society, why should they be allowed to help determine the fate of people who do?

[Boon 0]

Who's going to be the guy that makes the criminals/black guys don't vote joke?

[cbacon 0]

Criminals give up their right to vote once they've committed their crime(in an ideal, intelligent system of course...). If they can't live within the rules of their society, why should they be allowed to help determine the fate of people who do?

 

Because they are ultimately effected by who is in power, just like every other citizen. They deserve the right to vote just as anyone else. Can't live within the rules of society? That's why they're sent to jail, but that's no reason to deny them their basic rights as a citizen.

[The Metal Maniac 0]

But aren't things like having the freedom to walk outside whenever you want basic rights as a citizen?

 

If we're taking away that, I don't see why we can't keep taking.

 

Besides, I think it's silly. The Liberals essentially just guaranteed that every prisoner in all of Canada *will* vote for them. Couldn't have done it better if they paid every one of them 10 bucks for their votes.

[CanadianChris 0]

Besides, I think it's silly. The Liberals essentially just guaranteed that every prisoner in all of Canada *will* vote for them. Couldn't have done it better if they paid every one of them 10 bucks for their votes.

So THAT'S why Peter Milliken keeps getting elected.

[cbacon 0]

But aren't things like having the freedom to walk outside whenever you want basic rights as a citizen?

 

If we're taking away that, I don't see why we can't keep taking.

 

The freedom to walk outside is a right restricted to protect the populace from dangerous offenders.

 

Allowing prisoners to vote poses no harm. Where do you draw the line when it comes to restricting which rights to revoke?

[Justice 0]

But aren't things like having the freedom to walk outside whenever you want basic rights as a citizen?

 

If we're taking away that, I don't see why we can't keep taking.

 

The freedom to walk outside is a right restricted to protect the populace from dangerous offenders.

 

Allowing prisoners to vote poses no harm. Where do you draw the line when it comes to restricting which rights to revoke?

 

That's not an argument: There's no reason why they shouldn't have an Olympic-sized swimming pool, either, but we feel they don't deserve it. Just because it doesn't harm anyone does not mean that it is any more right.

 

Prison isn't just for our safety; It's also meant to be a punishment. Prison is meant to punish you by restricting your access to society. Not only this, many rights are already sacrificed when it comes to prisoners: Privacy for one (I believe the SCOC recognizes this), and Search and Seizure for another. Restrictions the rights is something inherent in the entire concept of prisons, and the right to vote is something simple and fairly logical to restrict. If you're in prison, should you really get a vote to decide what happens to people who have been obeying the law?

[Dogbert 0]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060118/wl_can...politics_ca_col

 

The Liberals: Let's see how badly we can lose this thing.

 

[/mercer]

[Lord of The Curry 0]

Yup, Martin is 99.9% fucked.

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

If the Liberals get rid of the NWSC, then if they ever get removed from office another party could implement a policy that the provinces can't opt out of - ie. abortion.

[Red Baron 0]

Martin has fucked himself right over.

 

I guess its time to get an American flag now and pitch it in my front lawn.

[Guest CWMwasmurdered]

Now, I'm just praying for a Minority government.

[cbacon 0]

But aren't things like having the freedom to walk outside whenever you want basic rights as a citizen?

 

If we're taking away that, I don't see why we can't keep taking.

 

The freedom to walk outside is a right restricted to protect the populace from dangerous offenders.

 

Allowing prisoners to vote poses no harm. Where do you draw the line when it comes to restricting which rights to revoke?

 

That's not an argument: There's no reason why they shouldn't have an Olympic-sized swimming pool, either, but we feel they don't deserve it. Just because it doesn't harm anyone does not mean that it is any more right.

 

Prison isn't just for our safety; It's also meant to be a punishment. Prison is meant to punish you by restricting your access to society. Not only this, many rights are already sacrificed when it comes to prisoners: Privacy for one (I believe the SCOC recognizes this), and Search and Seizure for another. Restrictions the rights is something inherent in the entire concept of prisons, and the right to vote is something simple and fairly logical to restrict. If you're in prison, should you really get a vote to decide what happens to people who have been obeying the law?

 

 

We're not talking about giving them a pool, we're talking about allowing them to keep the rights that every citizen, so long as its not infringing upon the safety of the general public.

 

Regardless of your sentence, who gets voted in ultimately affects the lifestyle of inmates, even though their existence is reduced to a small room. One party would be for privatizing prisons, whereas other parties do not share the same ideas toward corrections. These sorts of decisions have huge effects on the rehabilitative capabilities of the institutions, the inmates themselves, as well as their overall success rate. In regards to your point about punishment, the primary purposes of prisons should be:

 

1. Rehabilitation within a time frame. Unfortunately, not all institutions abide by that cause, but i believe that giving them their right to vote ensures that they have a choice in their future, because most of them aren't going to be incarcerated forever.

 

2. Protecting the public, not punishment. Jail is punishment and in a sense, revenge. Depending on which prison, a lot of what goes on in some prisons is inhumane. Seeking revenge via punishment against offenders is barbaric, childish, and it accomplishes absolutely nothing (which is what makes capital punishment totally unjust).

 

"Offenders should be encouraged to accept more responsibility for their future roles in the community. Voting promotes a sense of belonging and establishes a link between the offender and the community. Giving inmates the right to vote also demonstrates that as a society, we recognize that incarcerated individuals maintain responsibility during incarceration and after their release. Furthermore, voting privileges allow inmates to view themselves as participating members of society and not outcasts from it. After all, people are not sentenced to lack of citizenship." http://www.johnhoward.ab.ca/

 

Essentially what your saying is that we live in a democratic society but only some of us are allowed to vote. That's not a democracy.

[The Metal Maniac 0]

You do realize that only some people are allowed to vote in our democracy, right?

 

Hell, *I* couldn't vote until a few years ago.

 

And I agree with the way Tack worded it earlier; if you can't live within the rules of society, you should have no right to say what the rules should be.

[Justice 0]

We're not talking about giving them a pool, we're talking about allowing them to keep the rights that every citizen, so long as its not infringing upon the safety of the general public.

 

They don't keep the rights of every citizen, though. Rights of prisoners are restricted and regulated. When you commit a crime and are convicted, you do lose certain basic priviledges and rights (Privacy,

 

Regardless of your sentence, who gets voted in ultimately affects the lifestyle of inmates, even though their existence is reduced to a small room. One party would be for privatizing prisons, whereas other parties do not share the same ideas toward corrections. These sorts of decisions have huge effects on the rehabilitative capabilities of the institutions, the inmates themselves, as well as their overall success rate. In regards to your point about punishment, the primary purposes of prisons should be:

 

 

 

1. Rehabilitation within a time frame. Unfortunately, not all institutions abide by that cause, but i believe that giving them their right to vote ensures that they have a choice in their future, because most of them aren't going to be incarcerated forever.

 

Rehabilitation? Meh. It's an interesting idea, but the focus should be on the crime, not on the person. How do you rehabilitate a murderer, or a rapist? And what do you consider 'rehabilitated'? Honestly, the whole thing is fairly nebulous. I always felt that 'rehabilitation' made it seem like the prisoner was more important than the victim of the crime.

 

I believe you give that up when you commit a crime. You lose your voice in public say when disobey the law. Why? Because you get politicians like the Liberals, who are pandering to criminals to get into office. We shouldn't have to make campaign promises to people who are serving time for things like armed robbery, rape, and murder? Shouldn't Howard be concentrating on the populace who isn't serving time?

 

Those who are getting out can vote in the next election. Exercise your vote once you've served your time.

 

2. Protecting the public, not punishment. Jail is punishment and in a sense, revenge. Depending on which prison, a lot of what goes on in some prisons is inhumane. Seeking revenge via punishment against offenders is barbaric, childish, and it accomplishes absolutely nothing (which is what makes capital punishment totally unjust).

 

*Sigh*

 

No offense, but you are ignoring the fact that simply incarcerating them is a punishment, along with a restriction of rights. Even restricting them in some way for atonement could be considered a form of revenge. By your definition, the whole of law is set around revenge.

 

Revenge is about causing pain to another for previous actions. Punishment doesn't necessarily equate to pain, it's simply a penalty. Like the box in Hockey, you are sitting out because you broke the rules and are no longer allowed to participate. Of course, I'm sure you find that very inhumane as well.

 

"Offenders should be encouraged to accept more responsibility for their future roles in the community. Voting promotes a sense of belonging and establishes a link between the offender and the community. Giving inmates the right to vote also demonstrates that as a society, we recognize that incarcerated individuals maintain responsibility during incarceration and after their release. Furthermore, voting privileges allow inmates to view themselves as participating members of society and not outcasts from it. After all, people are not sentenced to lack of citizenship." http://www.johnhoward.ab.ca/

 

Ah, great. Sucking up to get votes.

 

Aren't you outcasting them in the first place by locking them up away from the rest of society? Even if it is 'for their own good', you're still seperating them off from society. Citizenship, while not rescinded, has many privledges revoked or restricted.

 

Essentially what your saying is that we live in a democratic society but only some of us are allowed to vote. That's not a democracy.

 

First off, you're a Republic. Secondly, there have always been voting restrictions: Look at the age restrictions. It's similar to that, in a sense, only rather than age it is the choices you have made.

[CheesalaIsGood 0]

Maybe not while IN prison, but once outside and have served their time they should be allowed to vote. I'd even compromise that they could wait a couple years before they would be eligable again. That's fair.

[2GOLD 0]

So just out of curiousity, when IS the voting taking place?

[Guest]

I *think* that I heard during the Toronto-Minnesota game last night that the voting takes place on Monday.

[Dogbert 0]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/cpress/20060119/ca_pr_on_na/fedelxn

 

Is Martin trying to completely alienate the States?

 

(I didn't like the first link I found.)

[Red Baron 0]

Went to my school debate. Apparently Niagara College doesn't know what the difference is between a provincal government and a federal government.

 

Second of all, I'm glad I don't live in that region because I would have voted for the party that wouldn't have a chance. Rob Nicholson side stepped every question that was against any policy against the Conservative platform. The NDP candidate apparently knows what a budget means, but does not know what debt means. The Liberal candidate just stood their like a fool and the Green Party candidate looked befounded.

[Justice 0]

Maybe not while IN prison, but once outside and have served their time they should be allowed to vote. I'd even compromise that they could wait a couple years before they would be eligable again. That's fair.

 

I agree wholeheartedly with this.

[CanadianGuitarist 0]

So just out of curiousity, when IS the voting taking place?

 

You're right.

 

Scuba, I second the arrival of the American flag upon our lawns...it seems inevitable at this point.

 

I will NEVER understand why so many are doing a complete 180 and going CPC on Monday, simply because of anger towards the Grits. It'd be like rooting for a new hockey team every time your team made a stupid play....Max and NSKie would have had about 15 different jerseys were this the case

[CanadianChris 0]

So just out of curiousity, when IS the voting taking place?

 

You're right.

 

Scuba, I second the arrival of the American flag upon our lawns...it seems inevitable at this point.

 

I will NEVER understand why so many are doing a complete 180 and going CPC on Monday, simply because of anger towards the Grits. It'd be like rooting for a new hockey team every time your team made a stupid play....Max and NSKie would have had about 15 different jerseys were this the case

It's just as much because the Liberals have run one of the worst campaigns in a hundred years.

 

The whole deal with Buzz Hargrove was the coup de grace.

 

And at least with your hockey team, you're not paying them half your income to watch them screw up whether you go to a game or not.

[Dogbert 0]

http://www.canada.com/story.html?id=50a290...e552cba&k=97644

 

They'd better hope that the mass media doesn't take this and run with it.

[Justice 0]

All this shit... is it like karmic retribution for the Liberals secretly killing puppies or something? Sweet Jesus, this makes the last US election look positively professional.

Edited January 20, 2006 by Justice

[CanadianGuitarist 0]

All this shit... is it like karmic retribution for the Liberals secretly killing puppies or something? Sweet Jesus, this makes the last US election look positively professional.

 

 

From that link...

And it is typical of the Liberal campaign on a national basis.

 

Yeah, that type of fair and non biased writing is noteworthy ....

 

Doesn't matter. Harper might as well change hislast name to Shepherd, since we're 3 days away from becoming a nation of sheep.