Should prisoners have the right to vote?

so,here's a question for my fellow British citizens:
do you think Jon Venables/peter Sutcliffe/Ian Brady/Myra Hindlay should get the right to vote for anything?

[QUOTE]   [b]Micrówave wrote: [/b] Yes, an interesting dilemna, except ONE thing. Prisoners are not interested in politics, sports, or the outside world.  ANY chance of doing something to break up the monotony of the day, they'll do it, push for it, demand it, etc.  They have no interest in the actual act (voting) but if it gets them out of the cell for five extra minutes, they'll do it and try to make the most of it. [/QUOTE] Resurrecting this because you're wrong.  WRONG! :) And because this is a music forum, and your wrongness in this instance ultimately has a music connection. Prisoners have the right to vote in Canada as a result of a Supreme Court decision known as Sauvé v. Canada 2002.  Sauvé in this instance is Rick Sauvé, a man co-convicted of first degree murder in the late 1970's with fellow members of the Satan's Choice Motorcycle Club.  Sauve became the first Canadian prisoner to earn a University degree behind bars and became active in prisoner's rights initiatives.  He launched the challenge to the law preventing prisoners from voting while he was incarcerated and was ultimately successful almost 20 years later a few years after he was paroled. His words on why the challenge was important to him and other prisoners : [url=http://archives.cbc.ca/politics/rights_freedoms/clips/9561/]http://archives.cbc.ca/politics/rights_freedoms/clips/9561/[/url] The music connection is this: The victim in this case was a man who was shot to death in a bar in Port Hope, Ontario in 1978.  Every member of the Satan's Choice club there that night was charged and convicted though the probable truth was that only one man was the shooter and there was no prior knowledge or conspiracy by the other men. A fantastic book was written by a man named Mick Lowe called 'Conspiracy of Brothers' that laid out a compelling case that the real conspiracy was the collusion of law enforcement against men innocent of the crime but vulnerable to societal and judicial prejudice because of who and what they were.  Somehow alt country rocker Steve Earle got hold of the story and wrote a song called 'Justice in Ontario'. The song is bookended with historical references to an Ontario family that was murdered through vigilante justice early in Canada's history with the story of Rick Sauvé et al in the middle.  If you decide to listen, I apologize for the shitty Karaoke version and the crap appended at the end.  It was the only version I could find.

[QUOTE]

[b]JoxerTheDeityPirate wrote: [/b]

so,here's a question for my fellow British citizens:
do you think Jon Venables/peter Sutcliffe/Ian Brady/Myra Hindlay should get the right to vote for anything?[/QUOTE]
Canada's version of Ian Brady is a charming fellow named Paul Bernardo.  I think Bernardo, who will be in prison until he dies, should have the right to vote along with a nice roomy cell, a comfy bed, a nice big TV and access to all manner of courses and programs and amusements over the next 40 years.  He's an utter psychopath, as was Ian Brady.  These people are wildly ill equipped to follow any social moral code because they're wholly incapable of empathy. They're like deadly snakes.  You must handle them carefully at arms length and lock them away where they can't harm anyone else, but you don't kill or condemn a snake just for acting like a snake.  As such, in my opinion, the terrible damage they do to the lives of others should be considered and amended separately from this, and society shouldn't look at long tortured empty days in prison as the least the justice system can do to punish these people.  It's kind of like beating a three year old because she can't do trigonometry.

[QUOTE]

[b]Micrówave wrote: [/b]

Yes, an interesting dilemna, except ONE thing.

Prisoners are not interested in politics, sports, or the outside world.  ANY chance of doing something to break up the monotony of the day, they'll do it, push for it, demand it, etc.  They have no interest in the actual act (voting) but if it gets them out of the cell for five extra minutes, they'll do it and try to make the most of it.

As for internet access, I would think that would not be allowed, primarily because of how easy it would be to send/receive information PRIOR to screening it.  Sure they could look at the computer after the inmate uses it, but what good is that?[/QUOTE]
Generalizations, generalizations. No wonder you vote GOP.

[QUOTE]

[b]catqueen wrote: [/b]

[QUOTE]





[b]mooghead wrote: [/b]



Prisoners do not get internet access. When you hear about a prisoner updating his facebook page its because of an illegal mobile phone they have in their possession.

[/QUOTE]

Seriously?  I thought i had a reasonably accurate view of prisons, and i had a vague idea that they had internet access.




[/QUOTE]


If they have internet access its very limited access to very specific sites (educational stuff, jobcentre, benefits etc..)



I am prison service staff and have extremely limited access to the internet other that Ministry of Justice/NOMS sites etc.. ie. work related things.


They arent even allowed ps3's, DS's etc... or anything that is capable of connecting wirelessly.


Those that are found with mobiles in most cases get time added on to their sentence (it is now a criminal act for a member of staff to take a phone in without written permission of the Governor)

IMO everyone should be allowed to vote, regardless of whom they are and what they've done. There are some terrible people out there, and that is why they are in prison. What makes it a punishment is the elimintion of liberty; to take away the right to vote, especially when politicians have an impact upon their life, is IMO needlessly cruel.