Skip to comments.Kaine urges nonviolent offenders to seek rights restoration
Posted on 11/26/2009 5:46:01 PM PST by blueyon
Gov. Timothy M. Kaine, who leaves office in January, today encouraged people with nonviolent felony convictions who have paid their debt to society to apply to have their voting rights restored.
Speaking on his monthly call-in radio show on WTOP in Washington, Kaine noted that both he and his predecessor as governor, Mark R. Warner, have restored the rights of more Virginians than any of the previous governors of the commonwealth combined.
Virginia and Kentucky are the only states that require people who have lost their rights through felony convictions to apply for reinstatement. In addition to voting rights, convicted felons in Virginia may also not serve on juries or hold public office.
"I think folks who serve their time should have their rights restored, especially those who have been convicted of nonviolent felonies," said Kaine.
(Excerpt) Read more at 2.timesdispatch.com ...
Part of the problem is felony-flation. This category of crime used to be reserved for acts that were so bad they were worthy of being hanged. Now the various politically prominent outrages du jour have turned a plethora of former misdemeanors into felonies.
Someone pointed out on the earlier thread that the left-wing group responsible for organizing the felons is an Obama ACORN-type group.
For a long time I have questioned the practice of using felonies to strip the rights away from citizens. What is not a felony today could be a felony tomorrow. Not purchasing health insurance may be a felony soon, so should I loose my gun rights for resisting the unconstitutional law if it is passed? If a person commits a crime serious enough that he or she can not be trusted to carry a gun, then that person should not be out on the street.
I fully agree with you.
Actually, I agree with him on this. When a person is released from prison, or taken off parole, or serves out thier probation, ALL thier rights should be restored. Including firearms rights.
If that person cannot be trusted to be released back into society, then obviously they haven’t been locked up or restricted long enough.
With only a few exceptions, such as capital offenses, or child molestation-rape, a person ought to be allowed to start with a clean slate.
I’m with you but we are a minority here on torchesandpitchforks.com..lol
How come some enterprising reporter does not research how many of these felons who’ve had their rights restored later voted, and then were convicted of new felonies?
How come some reporter does not research how many felons who were released from jail from overcrowding were later convicted of additional felonies?
Why is it that we never hear how many paroled felons later are convicted of new crimes committed while on parole?
Why is it that we never hear the “rest of the story” when we hear about these instances where felons have been released, pardoned, paroled, or had their rights restored?
As if we need criminals making decisions that affect our lives.
Life is about the choices we make and, for better or worse, we all have to live with them.
My felony was drunk driving. Fortunately I live in a state that returns my right to vote once incarceration and parole or probation is finished.
Wait till we see the sudden explosion in the number of felonies due to people not buying their socialized health care plan.
Our rights are God-given, not by man but by God. While incarcerated, sure, after a trial, a person cannot possibly exercise those rights. But when he is freed, all of his rights should be restored. Would our Founding Fathers disarm or remove free speech from someone who has done his time? I’m not sure, but they were pretty radical and erred towards freedom.
Our founders were for harsh punishment of a very limited number of crimes.
Not only has that horse already left the barn, it burned it to the ground and is living in Mexico somewhere.
Most criminals are Democrats.
We need to look at this from the democrat standpoint and what their real goal is. They aren’t looking at reformed “criminals” like myself. They’re really looking at prison inmates as the ultimate voting block.
Your average likely repeat offender who is out on the street in unreliable as a voter and most likely won’t vote at all. Prison inmates on the other hand are a whole different story. They’ll vote just to do something a little different for a day and they’ll vote for whoever promises to get them out soonest, promises the most perks, etc.
Can you imagine what a democrat would say at a prison campaign event?
I beg to differ with you about most criminals are political as if that was the case why would Kaine be trying to restore 300,000 voting rights?
That is enough to sway an election and Kaine would not be doing it if it would benefit any one other then democrats!
“Kaine urges nonviolent offenders to seek rights restoration” translation: “Hey criminal skunks come on in, register Democrat vote for Democrats several times each year and we’ve got a deal!”
Is this just me, or can anyone show me where in the Constitution there is a right vote? Maybe states have that written into their constitutions, but there is no nationwide right to vote.