Turn on thread page Beta
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Stefan1991)
    Firstly, that doesn't make logical sense. I'm beginning to think I'm arguing with a 10 year old. That's not how rights work, just because you violate someone's human rights does not mean your human rights should be taken away from you. By doing that you are basically condoning their act and saying it's okay to violate someone's human rights, and stooping down to their level. For what?

    Secondly, as has already been said, not all prisoners are rapists of murderers, a lot of prisoners have not violated ANYONE'S human rights. So that argument is not very well thought through...
    Fistly, as has already been said, i agree that petty criminals are not as bad as rapists or murderers, however they should still not get the vote.

    Secondly, if you do violate someone elses human rights, then yours should be violated. I simply cannot accept that someone can think a murderer, rapist or pedophile, should be treated the same as any other human being. Because thats what prisons are like now, they are treated better that some people who are not locked up.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Future Doc)
    However a society must be able to punish those that wrong to function. We have defined imprisonment to mean that person is isolated from society for society's protection and this includes the ability to vote. This should not change.
    Why should it include the ability to vote? Solely for the reason it provides a little bit "extra" punishment?

    Putting British democracy and human rights at stake for some primitive sense of revenge, rather than any logical reason, is not really worth providing such such little "extra" punishment, when only political prisoners would consider it a punishment.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kevR94)
    Fistly, as has already been said, i agree that petty criminals are not as bad as rapists or murderers, however they should still not get the vote.

    Secondly, if you do violate someone elses human rights, then yours should be violated. I simply cannot accept that someone can think a murderer, rapist or pedophile, should be treated the same as any other human being. Because thats what prisons are like now, they are treated better that some people who are not locked up.
    By treating them as inhuman, we meerly degrade ourselves to their standard. By locking them up, rather than ripping their throats out with our bare teeth, we show decorum, intelligence and morals.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Stefan1991)
    Why should it include the ability to vote? Solely for the reason it provides a little bit "extra" punishment?

    Putting British democracy and human rights at stake for some primitive sense of revenge, rather than any logical reason, is not really worth providing such such little "extra" punishment, when only political prisoners would consider it a punishment.
    Our entire legal system is built on the founding principle of revenge for punishment. It is pointless to lock someone up and yet allow them to play an active role in the outside world. It's like grounding a child but letting them use their mobile and facebook to talk to their friends. You've contained the person but still allowed the communication so the punishment is devalued.

    It obviously is a punishment because the law has been changed partially due to the campaigning of several prisoners.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Future Doc)
    By treating them as inhuman, we meerly degrade ourselves to their standard. By locking them up, rather than ripping their throats out with our bare teeth, we show decorum, intelligence and morals.
    Nobody said anything about treating them as inhuman, i am simply saying that they have violated someones human rights. Their human right is to vote, therefore they should not be allowed to vote. If someone is convicted for theft, they will be put in prison and will have to pay back the amount they have stolen. Is this degrading ourselves? its the same principle.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kevR94)
    Nobody said anything about treating them as inhuman, i am simply saying that they have violated someones human rights. Their human right is to vote, therefore they should not be allowed to vote. If someone is convicted for theft, they will be put in prison and will have to pay back the amount they have stolen. Is this degrading ourselves? its the same principle.
    No that is not inhuman, but the way you phrased your post suggested that you saw these people as beneath you. I completely agree they should not be able to vote however I do not believe they should be stripped of their human rights because they have taken someone elses.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kevR94)
    Who are the morons who arent capable of thinking for themselves?
    Labour voters.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Future Doc)
    No that is not inhuman, but the way you phrased your post suggested that you saw these people as beneath you. I completely agree they should not be able to vote however I do not believe they should be stripped of their human rights because they have taken someone elses.
    These people are beneath me. How come i can go through my life and not commit a single crime and a murderer in jail kills someone, we both get the same rights? It isnt right. Prisoners are already being treated very sweetly in jail, their sky tv, libary, games console, snooker table etc. These are some things which people who try to scrape by, by earning an honest wage, actually have to do without.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Einheri)
    Labour voters.
    Idiot.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kevR94)
    Fistly, as has already been said, i agree that petty criminals are not as bad as rapists or murderers, however they should still not get the vote.

    Secondly, if you do violate someone elses human rights, then yours should be violated. I simply cannot accept that someone can think a murderer, rapist or pedophile, should be treated the same as any other human being. Because thats what prisons are like now, they are treated better that some people who are not locked up.
    You seem confused on the subject of "rights".

    Here:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rights

    This should help!
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kevR94)
    (Original post by Stefan1991)
    [

    You said, basically that they aer experts on voting because they obviously disagree with the law so they commited it. If you disagree with the law you do not commit it, you say you disagree with it and protest to get it changed. Its not bloody hard.
    What makes you say that it's possible not to commit it? You have no reason to believe that a law can't be passed which you choose not to commit.

    What if you break the law by protesting it like in the case of Stephen Gough? Then you have no means of political redress when you do.

    Your naivety astounds me, simply because you do not understand the repercussions of flouting human rights, damaging the credibility and reputation of Britain abroad leaving us impossible to comment from a standpoint of moral authority on human rights, damaging British democracy, free speech, contravening international law, leaving a system open for abuse and exploitation by giving the state tyrannical powers to make and break laws and throw political prisoners in jail for breaking them and evoke civil death upon them so they can stifle dissent and disregard all human rights by not letting them protest democratically against the matter, just for the sake of providing some prisoners "extra" punishment out of some primitive emotional urge for revenge.

    If you are too pigheaded to realise how pointless and futile, whilst incredibly damaging this policy is, then you are far more stupid than I originally gave you credit for.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mjeezy)
    You seem confused on the subject of "rights".

    Here:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rights

    This should help!
    I understand fully what rights are, thank you very much. It is the idiotic people who say they deserve the same rights as a harworking, law abiding citizen, who dont understand what rights are.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kevR94)
    These people are beneath me. How come i can go through my life and not commit a single crime and a murderer in jail kills someone, we both get the same rights? It isnt right. Prisoners are already being treated very sweetly in jail, their sky tv, libary, games console, snooker table etc. These are some things which people who try to scrape by, by earning an honest wage, actually have to do without.
    I will freely admit that the current prison situation is disgusting but they are still human beings. They have a right to a fair trial and a right to freedom of abuse and torture. They should not be allowed to vote though. But they remain human beings.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Stefan1991)
    What makes you say that it's possible not to commit it? You have no reason to believe that a law can't be passed which you choose not to commit.

    What if you break the law by protesting it like in the case of Stephen Gough? Then you have no means of political redress when you do.

    Your naivety astounds me, simply because you do not understand the repercussions of flouting human rights, damaging the credibility and reputation of Britain abroad leaving us impossible to comment from a standpoint of moral authority on human rights, damaging British democracy, free speech, contravening international law, leaving a system open for abuse and exploitation by giving the state tyrannical powers to make and break laws and throw political prisoners in jail for breaking them and evoke civil death upon them so they can stifle dissent and disregard all human rights by not letting them protest democratically against the matter, just for the sake of providing some prisoners "extra" punishment out of some primitive emotional urge for revenge.

    If you are too pigheaded to realise how pointless and futile, whilst incredibly damaging this policy is, then you are far more stupid than I originally gave you credit for.
    It is your naivety which astounds me. I cannot and never will, accept that scum in prisons sould have the same rights as anybody else. They have broken the law for christ sake. No matter how many personal comments you decide to throw at me, your view on this will be wrong.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Of course they should if they are only in for the minimum term and are due to be released within 5 years. Then why not i know someone who have been sent to prison for 12 months because of someone elses fault she crashed into him on a country lane (he was a truck driver).

    This should not be extended to criminals over 5 years imo which will be people on the death minimum sentence with good behaviour.

    However one problem with implementing this is that pricks in power will be passing over priveledges to these prisoners that will get them to vote in favour for one liar.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kevR94)
    I understand fully what rights are, thank you very much. It is the idiotic people who say they deserve the same rights as a harworking, law abiding citizen, who dont understand what rights are.
    I agree with you there. But you seem to be confused on the line between natural rights and legal rights.

    Prisoners are not contributing members of society, so why should they have a say in how society works? It just makes sense. But you keep talking about taking away their "human rights". What are those exactly?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kevR94)
    Who are the morons who arent capable of thinking for themselves?

    X factor viewers
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Future Doc)
    I will freely admit that the current prison situation is disgusting but they are still human beings. They have a right to a fair trial and a right to freedom of abuse and torture. They should not be allowed to vote though. But they remain human beings.
    Now againg i havent said anything about abuse and torture have i? Yes they have a right to a fair trial and freedom (depending on their crime), but the whole point in this post is that they are already treated extreamly fairly, they should not be allowed to vote. Next the same idiotic people will complain that living confined, behing walls, is a violation of human rights, they must be allowed to roam freely.

    At least there is someone on this post which makes sense and has some sort of intelligence. Thank god.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Future Doc)
    Our entire legal system is built on the founding principle of revenge for punishment. It is pointless to lock someone up and yet allow them to play an active role in the outside world. It's like grounding a child but letting them use their mobile and facebook to talk to their friends. You've contained the person but still allowed the communication so the punishment is devalued.

    It obviously is a punishment because the law has been changed partially due to the campaigning of several prisoners.
    Imprisonment shouldn't be a punishment. Since when do two wrongs make a right? Imprisonment should be a deterrent and a practical solution for separating the more dangerous elements of society and protecting the rights of individuals. Furthermore it should be about rehabilitation of criminals into non-offending functioning members of society, not about mindless punishment for the sake of punishment. How is that going to improve things? Apart from foster a sense of bitterness and resentment in criminals towards society leading them to hate it and attempt to disrupt it even more.

    And how exactly is it wrong to let them decide participate in society, especially if it helps in the rehabilitation process? It's like saying why should I be able to vote for a government in London when I live in Manchester. Last time I checked, prisons weren't self autonomous state like societies, but they are run by the government. They are part of the same society, just temporarily separated.

    Prisoner abuses can and DO happen. Unfortunately the government know there's nothing prisoners can do towards political redress, and this is abused. Rambling on about how they should be punished as much as possible just sounds like the rantings of the typical Daily Mail reader who has no concept of sociology or criminology. Ultimately we should do what's best for society, giving prisoner votes benefits society more than the prisoner, restricting prisoner voting benefits NOBODY.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kevR94)
    Now againg i havent said anything about abuse and torture have i? Yes they have a right to a fair trial and freedom (depending on their crime), but the whole point in this post is that they are already treated extreamly fairly, they should not be allowed to vote. Next the same idiotic people will complain that living confined, behing walls, is a violation of human rights, they must be allowed to roam freely.

    At least there is someone on this post which makes sense and has some sort of intelligence. Thank god.
    No you didn't. However I once again believed that your comment that they should not have the same rights as hard-working citizens implied that. I'm not sure where you draw the line of removing rights.

    Thankfully, it would never get to that point. The human rights is vague in some areas but clear that they cannot be detained arbitrary. If they've committed a crime, they can get imprisoned.
 
 
 
Poll
Who is most responsible for your success at university
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.