The right of prisoners to vote in Ireland

bonkey

Amnesiac_ie wrote:

If you equate the right to vote with the right to freedom of movement, why not deny the right to vote to hospital patients, the physically disbaled etc?

Because to do so would be to confuse the distinction between the right to freedom of movement, and the ability to move freely.

If you deny the people the right to change those laws then law itself is undermined as it can't be changed by the people who disagree with it

No, it can't be changed by those who are serving time for having broken it at the time of any relevant vote, not by those who disagree with it. There's again a clear distinction that you're not making.

jc

Sleepy

If you can't abide by the law of the land, why should you have a voice in changing it?

Sure, people held on remand have a case to get their vote made, but how many people are actually held on remand that aren't guilty? I'd say it's quite a low number to be fair.

Gurgle

bonkey wrote:

No, it can't be changed by those who are serving time for having broken it at the time of any relevant vote, not by those who disagree with it. There's again a clear distinction that you're not making.
jc

Hypothetical situation:
There is a public vote coming up to decide on the legal status of cannabis. Just before the vote, the gardaì are sent out on a crusade to arrest as many people as humanly possible for possesion. All the smokers are held for the day when the vote is on, it stays illegal by 51% v 49%.

Is that democracy in action ?

Under current legislation, all those people (tens if not hundreds of thousands) are criminals. I know of nobody who has ever been arrested for possesion but thats a matter of policy not law.

Back to the point:
Whether right or wrong, criminals have the right to vote.
They don't have the right of access to a polling station.
Whatever the effect, either incidental or deliberate, that is a loophole and loopholes can be (and sooner or later will be) exploited.

A Dub in Glasgo

Sleepy wrote:

but how many people are actually held on remand that aren't guilty? I'd say it's quite a low number to be fair.

Surely that is irrelevant if you agree with the 'Innocent until proven guilty' principle

tribble

Sleepy wrote:

If you can't abide by the law of the land, why should you have a voice in changing it?

If I were living in a perfect democracy then I'd agree with you - but we don't and it is often necessary for a significant number of people to be seen to break the law before the law is changed.

Sleepy wrote:

Sure, people held on remand have a case to get their vote made, but how many people are actually held on remand that aren't guilty? I'd say it's quite a low number to be fair.

By that same logic, why should one bother to vote at all!

bonkey wrote:

No, it can't be changed by those who are serving time for having broken it at the time of any relevant vote, not by those who disagree with it. There's again a clear distinction that you're not making.

I see your point but do not agree with it because of lazy way we have of balloting only when it becomes apparent that the law is being flouted.

Gurgle

pickarooney wrote:

Just to play devil's advocate here, if we had an outbreak of SARS or similar infection requiring quarantine, would people affected (by the quarantine if not necessarily by the virus) be allowed to vote?

Yes, electronically

Elmo

What about a special TD for prisoners.

Should a Murder be allowed vote?

Where do you draw the line?

bonkey

Well, apparently you don't draw it, Elmo. At least, thats the inescapable conclusion for anyone who believes that its a Human Right. If it is, then it doesn't matter what number of inhumane acts someone has done, nor how heinous they were....they still get to vote.

Personally I disagree with that, but if its the EU's official stance, then Ireland should revise its laws to be in compliance with that.

jc

Elmo

Personally I disagree with that, but if its the EU's official stance, then Ireland should revise its laws to be in compliance with that.

Does Ireland have to comply with everything that the EU does?

A Dub in Glasgo

Elmo wrote:

Does Ireland have to comply with everything that the EU does?

Yes, we gave it all up many years ago

Elmo

Yes, we gave it all up many years ago

Suppose we should all be happy with it so.


I think I will start voting FG. Not much point voting in people who do things when every thing is done for us in Brussels.

Victor

Xterminator wrote:

Can you imagine what kind of person might have convicted criminals best interests at heart?

Fianna Fáil?

Victor

Bonkey, stop trolling. It's not fair.

Sleepy wrote:

Sure, people held on remand have a case to get their vote made, but how many people are actually held on remand that aren't guilty? I'd say it's quite a low number to be fair.

Perhaps, even probably.

But there was a guy released last year after spending 18 months in Cloverhill (or is it Wheatfield, same complex). Charged with rape. Not previously identified by the victim prior to court. Based on description used by Gardaí. Description said 5'6", he was 6'5".

Anyway, how about we lock up lots of people (arbitarily or based on political bias, your choice) and not allow them to vote?

pickarooney wrote:

Just to play devil's advocate here, if we had an outbreak of SARS or similar infection requiring quarantine, would people affected (by the quarantine if not necessarily by the virus) be allowed to vote?

I imagine they would be entitled to postal / special voting (if they registered in time).