Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Let the Incarcerated Vote

theatlantic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 64 posts

Re: Let the Incarcerated Vote

#41

Post by opencl »

bufferoverflow wrote: post #36
benlumen wrote: post #33

I’m in the UK where we also don’t allow prisoners to vote, but I’ve always said they should have it for a simple reason - with the way it is, there’s an incentive for any given government to imprison the political opposition. Even if it’s not used, it’s there. Edit: downvoted already, interesting. I lean centre-right on most things

That's a weak argument. 1) You'd have to imprison millions of people to make a difference in most elections. 2) If you actually have the power to imprison so many people without consequences, you don't need to do it for the election's sake. Just fake the election results. Works for Putin, Lukashenko, and other dictators. Gulags are a pain to manage, especially in the modern world where information spreads like wildfi…

The US has millions of people incarcerated and a few million more who can't vote because they were formerly incarcerated.

Re: Let the Incarcerated Vote

#42

Post by pmachinery »

mcny wrote: post #28
roenxi wrote: post #9

Not my problem, but I'm torn on my opinion. On the one hand, seems like an interesting idea. On the other, the US is known as being too quick to incarcerate people. Rather than spend energy arguing about letting incarcerated people vote, it seems more useful to make sure that nobody is being locked up for victimless crimes and taking a harder look at why anyone is being locked up for non-violent crimes. It seems pote…

> Some people should not have a voice in society - like raping murderers. But why? If murderers should be disenfranchised then why not jaywalkers? People who leave the shopping carts in the middle of a parking lot? I would like to see people who have car alarms but don't shut them off for over five minutes be disenfranchised as well. Where does this end?

> If murderers should be disenfranchised then why not jaywalkers?

Presumably they are, if they're incarcerated. I don't see why the crime of the person should matter. What do people think they're going to vote for, a rape and murder party?

Being incarcerated is the punishment; denying the vote is just cheap populism, being seen to be 'tough on crime', with the added benefit (for politicians) that if prisoners have no vote there's no incentive to treat them humanely.

Re: Let the Incarcerated Vote

#43

Post by bufferoverflow »

opencl wrote: post #41
bufferoverflow wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a weak argument. 1) You'd have to imprison millions of people to make a difference in most elections. 2) If you actually have the power to imprison so many people without consequences, you don't need to do it for the election's sake. Just fake the election results. Works for Putin, Lukashenko, and other dictators. Gulags are a pain to manage, especially in the modern world where information spreads like wildfi…

The US has millions of people incarcerated and a few million more who can't vote because they were formerly incarcerated.

The US has millions of people incarcerated for crimes, not political dissidents.

Re: Let the Incarcerated Vote

#44

Post by saagarjha »

bufferoverflow wrote: post #43
opencl wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US has millions of people incarcerated and a few million more who can't vote because they were formerly incarcerated.

The US has millions of people incarcerated for crimes, not political dissidents.

A substantial majority have not been convicted of a crime and there is of course certain groups that tend to be incarcerated at higher rates.

Re: Let the Incarcerated Vote

#45

Post by Qwertious »

bufferoverflow wrote: post #43
opencl wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US has millions of people incarcerated and a few million more who can't vote because they were formerly incarcerated.

The US has millions of people incarcerated for crimes, not political dissidents.

We're not talking about jailing dissidents though, we're talking about jailing demographics that tend to vote for the opposition.

Re: Let the Incarcerated Vote

#46

Post by bhickey »

bufferoverflow wrote: post #43
opencl wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US has millions of people incarcerated and a few million more who can't vote because they were formerly incarcerated.

The US has millions of people incarcerated for crimes, not political dissidents.

You don't need to be a dissident to be politically disfavored. "Sarah Shannon and colleagues estimate that one-third of black men had a felony conviction in 2010—a significant increase over the past 30 years and far above the rate for white men." [0]

As one Watergate conspirator revealed in an interview, this was the purpose of the war on drugs: "by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities." [1]

[0] https://www.sentencingproject.org/news/5593/

[1] https://harpers.org/archive/2016/04/legalize-it-all/

Re: Let the Incarcerated Vote

#47

Post by rzz3 »

I support letting prisoners vote, absolutely. But one thing we should watch out for, is that prison gangs could have a lot of influence over those votes. We’d need to make sure there’s no way to know who another inmate voted for.

Re: Let the Incarcerated Vote

#48

Post by cnorthwood »

benlumen wrote: post #33

I’m in the UK where we also don’t allow prisoners to vote, but I’ve always said they should have it for a simple reason - with the way it is, there’s an incentive for any given government to imprison the political opposition. Even if it’s not used, it’s there. Edit: downvoted already, interesting. I lean centre-right on most things

This isn't 100% true. Prisoners serving sentences of less than a year can vote in Scotland

Re: Let the Incarcerated Vote

#49

Post by pmachinery »

eznzt wrote: post #6
zeeZ wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? I find it quite appalling how you can dismiss about 1.4 million people just like that.

I also find it quite appalling how people can commit a crime just like that, but here we are.

"Three Felonies A Day - How the Feds Target The Innocent is the story of how citizens from all walks of life - doctors, accountants, businessmen,political activists, and others - have found themselves the targets of federal prosecutions, despite sensibly believing that they did nothing wrong, broke no laws, and harmed not a single person."

http://www.harveysilverglate.com/books

Re: Let the Incarcerated Vote

#50

Post by souprock »

eznzt wrote: post #22
geowwy wrote: post #10

This is a distraction. Prison needs to be abolished. Let's concentrate on that instead.

And what do we do with people who are just too dangerous to keep about?

He didn't say anything about other punishment. There are many traditional punishments that have been used for thousands of years, some of which are still in use today. For example, the problem of shoplifting in Saudi Arabia is handled without incarceration. Maybe that is what he prefers.

If there isn't punishment, then nothing stops anybody from getting a group of friends together to dish out punishment. It'd be like Somalia. Eventually, if the group gets big and well-organized, it might be recognized internationally as the legitimate government.

Post reply on HN