[ukip72]

The European court of Human Rights has upheld the ruling saying we must give prisoners the right to vote.
What will Cameron do now, backbenchers will be furious and he claims it makes him "physically ill" to think of prisoners voting yet he is very pro-Europe?

[Kennedy7697]

They have done something wrong in our country, so why should they be allowed to vote about how it is controlled.

[ChapelTom]

The answer is NO. We should just ignore Europe for once, no-one in Britain wants to give prisoners the vote, so why should we have some unelected European bureaucrats tell us we should?

[Sdiff]

Could we leave the ECHR but stay in the EU?

I think most of our grievances come from the ECHR. I feel that we benefit from free trade and thus disagree with leaving the EU. I'm even happy for us to give away money if it means we can stay in the free trade zone. But thepings like this piss me off.

If we could leave the ECHR, it would be a godsend for David Cameron. I think most people would be relatively happy to stay in the EU if we left the ECHR and the euro crisis ended.

Cameron could have a referendum in 2014 to leave the ECHR and negotiate departure in 2015. If it was accompanied by a strong economic recovery, the tories would be almost guaranteed an overall majority.

[JacobW]

I think the idea that a gang of European judges can presume to lecture Britain on liberty is utterly revolting. The abhorrent nature of their particular greviance only makes the situation worse. Britain was a liberal constitutional state at a time when the rest of Europe laboured under despotic absolutist monarchs; just seventy years ago large swathes of the continent were under the rule of a mad, murderous German dictator. If the ECHR had the faintest idea as to how to guarantee real liberty, they would refrain from ever presuming to challenge the sovereignity of a government that has adapted itself to its people's needs through centuries of gradual reform on the basis of some half-baked notion of natural rights.

Nobody has a moral right to vote, particularly not convicted criminals.

[ukip72]

(Original post by Sdiff)
Could we leave the ECHR but stay in the EU?

I think most of our grievances come from the ECHR. I feel that we benefit from free trade and thus disagree with leaving the EU. I'm even happy for us to give away money if it means we can stay in the free trade zone. But thepings like this piss me off.

If we could leave the ECHR, it would be a godsend for David Cameron. I think most people would be relatively happy to stay in the EU if we left the ECHR and the euro crisis ended.

Cameron could have a referendum in 2014 to leave the ECHR and negotiate departure in 2015. If it was accompanied by a strong economic recovery, the tories would be almost guaranteed an overall majority.

To be a member of the EU you have to be a member of the the ECHR. However to get free trade we do not have to pay tax money to to the EU or put up with any of its other laws such as ECHR membership, we can just join the European Free Trade Association as Switzerland, Norway, Iceland and Lichtenstein have done. EU membership is completely unnecessary. Sadly Cameron is a Europhile and would never allow us to withdraw from either and the Euro is not close to being saved.

[meenu89]

Anyone in prison should not be allowed the vote.

[ApresAlkan]

(Original post by ukip72)
The European court of Human Rights has upheld the ruling saying we must give prisoners the right to vote.
What will Cameron do now, backbenchers will be furious and he claims it makes him "physically ill" to think of prisoners voting yet he is very pro-Europe?

Why don't you think that any prisoners should vote?

(Original post by Kennedy7697)
They have done something wrong in our country, so why should they be allowed to vote about how it is controlled.

1) They have no Free Will; their actions were due to causes beyond their control, and so should not be punished by losing rights, just rehabilitated.
2) They are still citizens, their welfare is controlled by whoever is in power, they should have the chance to have an influence.
3) Innocent people are prisoners.

(Original post by ChapelTom)
The answer is NO. We should just ignore Europe for once, no-one in Britain wants to give prisoners the vote, so why should we have some unelected European bureaucrats tell us we should?

The ECtHR is made up of some of the greatest intellectuals from Europe, and they are speaking sense. I'm in Britain, I want prisoners to vote, and so do most people I know. These bureaucrats have very good points, why don't you listen to them?

(Original post by Sdiff)
Could we leave the ECHR but stay in the EU?

What don't you agree with in the Convention?

[QUOTE]I think most of our grievances come from the ECHR. I feel that we benefit from free trade and thus disagree with leaving the EU. I'm even happy for us to give away money if it means we can stay in the free trade zone. But thepings like this piss me off.[/QUOTE}
The free trade is good, the free movement is good, the cultural unity is good.

Why do you disagree with prisoners' right?

If we could leave the ECHR, it would be a godsend for David Cameron. I think most people would be relatively happy to stay in the EU if we left the ECHR and the euro crisis ended.

What is wrong with the Convention? Why would leaving the EU mean that the Eurozone crisis affected us any less?

(Original post by JacobW)
I think the idea that a gang of European judges can presume to lecture Britain on liberty is utterly revolting. The abhorrent nature of their particular greviance only makes the situation work. Britain was a liberal constitutional state at a time when the rest of Europe laboured under despotic absolutist monarchs; just seventy years ago large swathes of the continent were under the rule of a mad, murderous German dictator. If the ECHR had the faintest idea as to how to guarantee real liberty, they would refrain from ever presuming to challenge the sovereignity of a government that has adapted itself to its people's needs through centuries of gradual reform on the basis of some half-baked notion of natural rights.

Nobody has a moral right to vote, particularly not convicted criminals.

Ad hominem at the top,

And an unjustified assertion beneath.

(Original post by ukip72)
To be a member of the EU you have to be a member of the the ECHR. However to get free trade we do not have to pay tax money to to the EU or put up with any of its other laws such as ECHR membership, we can just join the European Free Trade Association as Switzerland, Norway, Iceland and Lichtenstein have done. EU membership is completely unnecessary. Sadly Cameron is Europhile and would never allow us to withdraw from either and the Euro is not close to being saved.

What is wrong with the European Union? It's nothing but good for us all... If you look at figures unmanipulated by buffoons at certain parties, you'll see what I mean...




Please could anyone who gives negative reputation to this post send me a Private Message justifying it... Thanks!

[JacobW]

(Original post by ApresAlkan)

Ad hominem at the top,

And an unjustified assertion beneath.

1.) It wasn't an ad hominem. It was an assertion as the unfitness of the ECHR judges to decide whether or not prisoners should have the vote, followed by an argument intended to establish their unfitness.

2.) Unjustified, not unjustifiable. I don't feel inclined to get into an argument about ethics now, but essentialy I don't believe that natural rights exist because a right a is a relation between people in a society and so cannot exist prior to and independently of a particular set of social arrangements, and I don't believe prisoners should have a legal right to vote because, as a rule, they are ignorant, irrational, and impulsive and consequently not fit to decide who should represent them in Parliament.

[TCD23]

Part of a punishment is that you have given up the natural rights you have been imbued with. One of these is the right to vote and thus prisoners shouldn't be allowed to vote. It's part of their punishment.

[ukip72]

(Original post by ApresAlkan)
Why don't you think that any prisoners should vote?

What is wrong with the European Union? It's nothing but good for us all... If you look at figures unmanipulated by buffoons at certain parties, you'll see what I mean...

No I don't believe any prisoners should be entitled to vote.

The EU is certainly not good for us all, I won't go into the arguments now unless you want me to?

[Eightyeight]

I think they should purely because they shouldn't lose their human rights simply for going to prison. They don't become less entitled to the rights even if they are incarcerated.

[rali]

By breaching the code of law that provides them with their human rights, the only fitting punishment is to take those rights away. Actions come with consequences, and not being allowed to vote should be one of them.

[FDR]

(Original post by ukip72)
The European court of Human Rights has upheld the ruling saying we must give prisoners the right to vote.
What will Cameron do now, backbenchers will be furious and he claims it makes him "physically ill" to think of prisoners voting yet he is very pro-Europe?

Regardless of what Cameron, or the cronies on the backbenches think, it is absolutely the right decision.

If prisoners cannot vote, then that gives the state the ability to choose it's electorate, meaning we are not a true democracy. This isn't an issue of being 'pro Europe' or not, it's about being pro democracy.

[Rosalind]

Can I suggest we disregard any threads involving the pro/anti europe arguments that are started by someone with 'UKIP' in their username

[shirley7]

No. It's perfectly simple and all these do-gooders are making it an issue when it shouldn't be one. If you break the law you have no right to decide who makes the law.

[shirley7]

(Original post by Rosalind)
Can I suggest we disregard any threads involving the pro/anti europe arguments that are started by someone with 'UKIP' in their username

How about no?

[Dmon1Unlimited]

im unsure

part of me thinks about the minority of innocents that are there, not having the right to vote and such
then again, most of them in there are not innocent

part of me thinks that they are part of this society and should have the right to voice their opinion in the form of voting
then again, regarding the most that are not innocent, they would have pulled the middle finger at society the second they committed the crime... this is quite a significant factor

part of me thinks its not very fair, like not giving the bnp a right to vote
then again, this is to do with crime, not alternate/outrageous views

im a bit fence-ish, though id lean towards not having the right to vote, as long as they are inside... when they come out, back to normal (within reason), though i can be persuaded otherwise...

[ukip72]

(Original post by FDR)
Regardless of what Cameron, or the cronies on the backbenches think, it is absolutely the right decision.

If prisoners cannot vote, then that gives the state the ability to choose it's electorate, meaning we are not a true democracy. This isn't an issue of being 'pro Europe' or not, it's about being pro democracy.

The state does not have the ability to chose the electorate at all. The INDEPENDENT and NEUTRAL judiciary decides who goes to prison, not the state. Allowing prisoners to vote would do nothing to enhance democracy. I'm afraid I believe Cameron's pro-Europe instinct is what is preventing him from ignoring this ruling as he should do.

[ed-]

By the time the European Court of Civil Rights has finished being in prison won't be a punishment at all...
By breaking the law, and going to prison, a person gives up some of their civil liberties... Voting is one of those civil liberties...
I can see the ECHR saying countries aren't allowed to deny prisoners freedom of movement next ...