Convicted Felons Should Retain The Right to Vote Essay

However, that leaves a whole 33percent of ex felons that do not commit another crime and want to be productive members of society an ‘’earn’’ there voting rights back. Granted, being that statistics show a greater number of reoffending felons this is good cause to why society and the communities these ex felons reside are against felons voting. On the contrary State data shows that most prison admissions are for probation or parole violations. Maybe that's because punishment is so light: 79 percent of state inmates are released before reaching their maximum sentences. In other words, maybe they aren't afraid of being reincarcerated because they know they'll never serve their full terms and continue to commit certain crimes as a cry for help.

Since the beginning of the United States government, Americans have had the right to vote. This right is entitled to most citizens of America, but it is not entitled to citizens that have been convicted of felonies. This is called disenfranchisement; where an ex-felon cannot vote, own a weapon or go into the army. Specifically, voter disenfranchisement; only two states in the US are not subject to this law. In the past 40 years due to disenfranchisement the United States criminal justice system has withheld the voting rights of 6.1 million Americans due to their convictions. Maine and Vermont do not hold restrictions due to past felonies. With over 3.1 million civilians out of prisons or other facilities this hurts the overall point of democracy, making it unconstitutional to withhold these rights that are stated in the amendments for the knowledge of American citizens.

6.1 million Americans cannot vote because of a felony conviction, among the 6.1 million are large groups of the underrepresented. Representation is important when you intend to represent an entire country, so when 6.1 million voters, which of majority are minorities, are disenfranchised, there is a massive cut of representation in our system. This is exactly what is happening right now in the United States. As of 2016, an estimated 6.1 million people were disenfranchised due to a felony conviction. This figure has escalated dramatically in recent decades as the population under criminal justice supervision has increased. Even those who have completed their sentences in the ten states (Nevada, Arizona, Wyoming, Iowa, Kentucky, Tennessee, Missouri, Alabama, Florida, and Delaware) that disenfranchise people, post-sentence, make up over 50 percent of the entire disenfranchised population; totaling almost 3.1 million people. If these votes were to be restored, representation would increase, leading to an equal

Those that are against such a disenfranchisement, however, have arguments of their own. The first such argument observes that not all felons are evil or immoral to the same degree; in many cases, those that are arrested are average citizens and do not deserve such harsh treatment. According to statistics of the Uniform Crime Report (UCR) of the Federal Bureau of Investigations of 2007 approximately 14,380,370 arrests were made nationwide, or 4,832.5 of every 100,000 people. Arrests and convictions are not made solely on murderers, molesters, and rapists; common nonviolent crimes, such as shoplifting or drug possession, are included in these statistics as well. Sanford McLaughlin, a Mississippi resident, was disenfranchised for life because he was found guilty of passing a bad check for $150 (“Losing” 5). The law automatically assumes that McLaughlin is a criminal; in reality, he could be an upstanding citizen that made one poor decision that affected his entire life. Unfortunately, disenfranchisement laws do not look at crime itself, just at the occurrence of such an incident. There is no regard for felon’s criminal history, or lack thereof, or the type of crime he committed. Another factor regarding the lack of wisdom is the age of

If we thought that prisoners could not be rehabilitated, then they should not be released. If felons are released, we make a judgment that they are fit to live in society; therefore, they are capable of making trustworthy decisions.

“We let ex-convicts marry, reproduce, buy beer, own property and drive. They don’t lose their freedom of religion, their right against self-incrimination… they can’t be trusted to help choose our leaders… If we thought criminals could never be reformed, we wouldn’t let them out of prison in the first place (Chapman, Steve).” Many believe that felons should be able to vote due to the fact that they served their time in prison and already received their consequence. When felons already served their time, they are told they have their “freedom”. Yet, they do not have the same rights they did before they were arrested. Felons have paid enough of a price by serving their assigned sentence which shouldn’t lead

Felons need voting rights too! Felons and voting rights are starting to become a big deal. Felons are wanting the right to vote, but some states will not give them that right. All states should let felons vote depending on how severe their crime was. It is not right to deny someone the right to vote. There are multiple reasons for why they shouldn't vote, but there are also some good reasons or why they should be able to vote. Felons deserve the right to vote for multiple reasons.

“The United States has among the world's most restrictive felon disenfranchisement laws” (Green). The areas in the United States that do not allow ex-felons the right to

Should ex-felons be able to vote once they complete their sentence in prison? About 5 million people with a felony conviction can’t cast a vote in elections. In different states, there are different laws which mean some states go about felon voting differently. There are 9 states who permanently banned you from voting. People who are against ex -felons rights being restored argue no, because they feel that felons couldn’t make logic decisions before they got in prison so why would they be able to make logic decisions once they’re out. People who are for felons to be able to vote argue yes, because regardless of what they have done in their past, they’ve already paid for their crime and it is unfair. (Feaser). By law American citizens have the right to vote. Felons who have paid their debt to society by completing their sentences should have all their rights and privileges restored. By letting felons vote it will make the voting more diverse, and equal. Also allowing felons to vote will help with their transition back into society.

“There is an estimated number of 5.85 million Americans who are prohibited from voting due to laws that disenfranchise citizens convicted of felony offenses.” (Uggen). Varying by state, each disenfranchisement law is different. Only 2 out of 50 U.S. states; Vermont & Maine, authorize voting from convicted felons incarcerated and liberated as shown in (Fig. 1). But of the 48 remaining states these rights are either prohibited or authorized in at least 5 years succeeding to liberation. This disenfranchisement needs to be retracted due to fact that convicted felons; incarcerated or liberated, are U.S. citizens who are guaranteed constitutional rights that should allow them as citizens to have equal opportunity in political and social

The first problem that can be solved with giving felons their rights back is giving them a way back out of trouble ,and away to be a modeled citizen. For example, in this article Vikki Hankins a convicted felonies tells of her quest to get her rights back. She has tried multiple times with no positive outcome. Her dream is to become a lawyer but because of her record she can’t take the bar exam (Penaloza 1). This here leads to some individuals going back to life they know better such as crime. Since they can no longer progress at a scholarly level into a professional level people tend to settle for less or even reform to crime(Penaloza 1).

About 6.1 million Americans convicted of a felony have been barred from voting by the law in most states (Chung 1). The condition regarded to as felon disenfranchisement is controlled by laws provided for by the individual states within the US. Unlike the states of Maine and Vermont which allow felons the right to vote while in incarceration, most other states have withdrawn the right from convicts. Ten states in the country have permanently restricted specific felons from participating in elections. With the argument that the country’s legacy in safeguarding democracy through felon disenfranchisement, opponents of the idea assert that by completing their sentences, felons have paid the debt owed to the society and should have their privileges and rights fully restored. They further assert that part of the efforts to uphold democracy is to get rid of unfair provisions such as laws advocating for felon disenfranchisement. On the other hand, proponents note that felons and ex-felons should be allowed to vote due to the expression of their poor judgment. While the debate continues to elucidate divergent views, numerous factors illustrate that felon disenfranchisement is inconsequential and does not contribute to the betterment of the country.

There are eleven states, Alabama, Arizona, Delaware, Florida, Iowa, Kentucky, Mississippi, Nevada, Tennessee, Virginia, and Wyoming, which make it exceedingly difficult, if not impossible, for some felons to regain their right to vote. Most of these states do not allow criminals who committed serious felonies such as rape, murder, and kidnapping to vote without an action by the Board of Parole or the governor of the

The voice of millions of Americans can’t be heard due to the disenfranchisement laws, which is vital living in a country that depends on votes for elected officials. There are many supporters and non-supporters of the disenfranchisement laws, and “since 1975 there have been 13 states that liberalized their laws, 11 states have passed further limitations on felons, and 3 states have passed both laws” (Manza, 2004). There is an on going debate among citizens and states whether or not to amend the disenfranchisement laws and allow more convicted ex-felons to use their voting rights. Some believe their voting rights should not be restored, because they are criminals, and it’s a part of being a criminal. Others are fighting that their voting rights should be restored, that people make mistakes, and if they have completed their sentence then they have served their punishment. Research shows a consensus

Although some states believe that voting is a privilege that can be taken away after intolerable behavior, ex-criminals should be given voting rights because they are heavily impacted by government decisions, the vote is consequently taken away from low income, minority factions, and the US has a historical record of disenfranchising people regarding their race, color, previous servitude, and sex, so we have reason to question the disenfranchisement of other minorities.