Customer Discussions > deals discussion forum

Prisoners rights?


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-25 of 135 posts in this discussion
Initial post: 12 Aug 2014 15:42:34 BDT
Ackers1 says:
Yet again the EU's tail is wagging the dog, talking of prisoners rights to vote.
The UK should stand by its guns on this one, and never give in!
Do they not realise that you are in prison for the most part because you have broken the law, should that not remove your rights.
Since the prisoner broke the law and did not abide by general consensus of opinion surrounding the law, why should they take an active part in a countries voting system that is paying the cost of their incarceration.
If they want to take an active part in decision making first they have to obey the law of the land.
If you break the law and have little respect for the population why should the population respect their choices and decisions until they have served their time and proved that they are fit to vote again.
Of course there will be prisoners who think that they have an entitlement but I would bet there are very few victims that would agree with them.

In reply to an earlier post on 12 Aug 2014 17:56:12 BDT
nikky g says:
By breaking the law, they have forfeighted the right to any human privilages.

Posted on 12 Aug 2014 18:40:26 BDT
Ben says:
for the pety crimes they should be able to vote but for the pedos and murders they should not have a say. either way were all human.

Posted on 12 Aug 2014 19:10:19 BDT
CJ says:
I wonder if they won the right if they would even bother voting. Just making trouble for troubles sake. Perhaps we should let them vote if they agree to watch every party politics broadcast for months on end.

In reply to an earlier post on 12 Aug 2014 19:16:06 BDT
Chris says:
Suspect they are not that fussed, but they (and their lawyers) smelt a few quid in compensation. At least the ECHR said no award.

Posted on 12 Aug 2014 19:25:56 BDT
4th Earl says:
A major problem is that there are just so many laws. The more laws there are, the more laws stand to broken. 'Widening the net and narrowing the mesh' as I recall. Not everyone who breaks the law robs a bank or murders someone. I'm willing to bet that the current economic climate has forced erstwhile 'upstanding' citizens to take risks that they would never usually take and get caught. I'd also bet that there has been a spike in prison sentences being handed out during this time too?
I'm certainly not mitigating the actions of truly evil people. Some people are simply too dangerous to be allowed to integrate into society and are, quite rightly, serving 'whole life' sentences. They will never leave prison alive.
So, is it right that a person serving a prison sentence of, say, six months, loses his or her right to vote? I don't think so. How is this disenfranchisement supposed to make a person a better individual, which ultimately, should be the aim of any prisoners prison sentence? Would not a prisoner, who was not allowed to vote, feel a little resentful? Perhaps there ought to be in place something along the lines of not being allowed to vote if their sentence is over a certain length? The type of crime committed?
An individual is given a prison sentence AS punishment. They do not go to prison FOR punishment...

Posted on 12 Aug 2014 20:24:45 BDT
Last edited by the author on 12 Aug 2014 20:30:37 BDT
Ackers1 says:
I had decided even before I read your article about giving a set period where if you exceed say 1 year then you lose the right to vote.
Only a relatively serious crime would be likely to have a term of a year or more, but if a constant offender the same should apply, all times served should be added up.
A person who offends repeatedly has no regard for his fellow man/woman and/or their right to a civilised and safe society.
If an offender might feel resentful should not society have a far greater right to feel so.
As said previously by another, a prisoner should without doubt forfeit his/her right to vote, maybe to some that too could be another deterrent although I feel no matter what is in place some care not one jot for such things. (After leaving prison there could be a probationary period where the offender should not reoffend say within the next two years)
Many criminals I feel go about their activities thinking that they will never get caught and it is certain that many never do.
It is also certain that not all in prison are guilty, it just means that the judicial system failed them at their time of need.
However saying that it is also very obvious that some offend because they have become institutionalised, are homeless or simply do not have the grey matter to support them selves in a legal way, the unintelligent would not find a reason to vote anyway.
After saying all of the above though, the UK should be able to make its own decisions on such a subject, these sorts of directives from the European Parliament are the very reason why we should leave the EU NOW!

Posted on 13 Aug 2014 01:05:32 BDT
Last edited by the author on 13 Aug 2014 21:07:41 BDT
wobberoo says:
I've no issue with anybody eligible voting. Can't see many lags desperate to put their 'X' on the ballot paper really, though. And what actual difference would it make if they did? Hardly likely to affect any result, is it?

Posted on 13 Aug 2014 08:34:52 BDT
eric rambler says:
I wonder how many of those seeking to vote from jail actually took the trouble when they were free? I don't suppose there is any way of telling but I suspect they just wish to vote now because now the "trouble" will not be theirs.

Posted on 13 Aug 2014 10:11:02 BDT
Sylvia Dare says:
We should be making and keeping our own laws ,the EU should have no say whatever in our laws .. we have the Magna Carta and should have our own bill of rights enough of this interference with our country the sooner we are out the better , and anyone in jail should have their right to vote taken away until they are law abiding citizens again , having said that people who are in jail for money crimes (not armed robbery etc ) but theft and petty crimes should not be in jail they should be made to pay back every single penny they have stolen by means of deducting it from their wage packet or DWP money no excuses .

Posted on 13 Aug 2014 12:38:17 BDT
Eugene says:
Of course prisoners should be able to continue voting. Why should they lose their identity or their basic rights? Do they lose the right to be treated as human beings? Besides, voting aids rehabilitation. Most countries allow the vote for prisoners, and here in Spain - not known for it's humanitarian prisons - all prisoners are allowed to vote. As they are in most countries. Britain retains a medieval attitude to prisoners - it is silly, old-fashioned, vengeful, and ultimately self-defeating.

Posted on 13 Aug 2014 18:26:52 BDT
Commit a crime against another person you automatically forfeit your human rights as they did not respect their victims human rights whilst committing the crime! For example the scrote who keyed the whole nearside of my motor a fortnight ago causing £600 of damage!

Posted on 13 Aug 2014 21:53:24 BDT
Ivan says:
Maybe they should do the same with prisoners as they do with everybody else - let them put their mark on a paper and pretend to them that it makes the blindest bit of difference to anything at all?
The power of the voter is the power of someone operating a disconnected switch.

Answering the question straight, firing from the gut - I would say absolutely not. Being in prison is a "choice" to opt out of social reciprocation and the choice should be honoured...
BUT
the the last couple of governments have been frantically authoring new legislation instead of actually fixing anything and by that process they have made criminals of many many people who would not have been thus labelled before. There's rules a-plenty growing like weeds, enough to make the most upright citizen a criminal by default should the jackbooted guardians of our "freedom" decide to look hard enough to find something that fits. All you need to do is keep a coded diary and lose the encryption key and that's enough to have you breaking rocks until the crack of doom should the control freaks take umbridge and brand you a terrorist. Smoke in your back-bedroom office and the camera on your wall will alert the jobsworthstapo that there is a dangerous law-breaker who needs to be shown room 101 from the inside.

Exploding collar and forced sedation, salt mines and transportation to the antipodes... might as well pretend to let 'em vote as part of the pretense of rehabilitation. They can decide who to waste their vote on from the information they'll see on their big colour televisions and from the Open University courses they'll be doing in Politics and Economics.

Bottom line?
I do NOT know the answer to the question. I wish I did.

Posted on 14 Aug 2014 05:07:14 BDT
4th Earl says:
Don't vote, it only encourages them!

Posted on 15 Aug 2014 12:05:56 BDT
eric rambler says:
How about letting them vote for that awful talent show Simon Cowell is on?

Posted on 15 Aug 2014 12:42:35 BDT
Ceebee says:
Why has nobody suggested, that if they lack judgement by breaking the law, why would you trust their judgement when voting? They shouldn't vote anyway, as there is no polling station in a prison. I'm sure some idiots (above?) would suggest they be allowed they leave the prison to vote.

Posted on 20 Aug 2014 13:26:46 BDT
PaulE says:
PRISONERS RIGHTS?
Their victims also had rights,totally ignored by the prisoners ,an eye for an eye?

In reply to an earlier post on 20 Aug 2014 23:57:04 BDT
4th Earl says:
Like Ghandi said, "If we have an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth, the world will be full of eyeless and toothless people"!

Posted on 21 Aug 2014 00:12:36 BDT
Caroelle says:
Many people in prison have not been convicted of an offence as they are remanded. And what about those people imprisoned for being poor eg unable to pay for a TV licence. Should they lose their rights to engage in a democratic process?

In reply to an earlier post on 21 Aug 2014 00:18:44 BDT
 says:
They have not been imprisoned for being poor.
They have been imprisoned for not paying the fine consequent on having no TV licence.

In reply to an earlier post on 21 Aug 2014 00:44:05 BDT
4th Earl says:
I'm afraid that they have been imprisoned for being poor though! Such people have poor diets and little else left for them to do. There are no jobs out there for them and they do not choose, contrary to the opinions held by Kate Hopkins and her ilk, to live these wretched lives! So if they watch TV without a licence, they are not committing the crime of the century but merely (normally) staying together. Perhaps it is time to stop doggedly pursuing such people for the sake of statistics and concentrate on making TV programmes that warrant the exorbitant licence fee, but that's another discussion...

Posted on 21 Aug 2014 00:59:53 BDT
Last edited by the author on 21 Aug 2014 01:00:19 BDT
 says:
Perhaps it is time they raised their quality of life by tossing their TV sets out of the window. The crime is in tuning in to tune out to the hegemonic agenda.

[* It strikes me as odd that if I do not register as a voter I am threatened with imprisonment, but once inside prison I am deemed to have forfeited the right to vote].

In reply to an earlier post on 21 Aug 2014 01:14:47 BDT
 says:
Following your post I wondered if the Vagrancy Act was still in force. I checked and am happy to draw this oddity to your attention, 4th Earl:

'In 2014, three men were arrested and charged under the 1824 Vagrancy Act for stealing food that had been put in skips and bins outside of an Iceland store in Kentish Town, North London. Paul May, William James and Jason Chan were due to stand trial after allegedly taking cheese, tomatoes and cakes from bins behind an Iceland shop. The Iceland chain denied any involvement of contacting police, and in a public statement questioned why the CPS felt it was in the public interest to pursue a case against the three individuals....'

In reply to an earlier post on 21 Aug 2014 05:58:04 BDT
Chris says:
Persons on remand are still able to vote.

In reply to an earlier post on 21 Aug 2014 10:50:19 BDT
4th Earl says:
Mmm! That is interesting indeed. Perhaps a Freedom Of Information request is in order for the CPS to answer to? In my experience, the CPS is an odd fish and it seems to me that its existence is purely owed to the massaging of figures! In the distant past, as a Trainee Legal Executive (the career I wish I'd pursued) I had experience of this and on one occasion in particular, I left court shaking my head in disbelief!
‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


Recent discussions in the deals discussion forum

Discussion Replies Latest Post
Amazon slow at dispatching...? 1117 1 hour ago
EU, in or out? 74 1 hour ago
What annoys you? 7729 1 hour ago
Phew what a scorcher 47 1 hour ago
offical yodel complaints forum 3200 2 hours ago
What is a Troll? 33 3 hours ago
third runway. 9 4 hours ago
Hermes parcel delivery - Utter incompetence and worse than anything Amazon ever used 3053 10 hours ago
Tell us a Joke 2 4724 11 hours ago
Skinners arms pub 2486 13 hours ago
Companies who use Yodel 240 20 hours ago
Home Delivery Network Rubbish 469 22 hours ago

More Customer Discussions

Most active community forums
Most active product forums

Amazon forums
 

This discussion

Discussion in:  deals discussion forum
Participants:  29
Total posts:  135
Initial post:  12 Aug 2014
Latest post:  19 Oct 2014

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 4 customers

Search Customer Discussions