Posted on 01/05/2010 4:13:05 PM PST by janetjanet998
Edited on 01/05/2010 4:19:49 PM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]
See post #32
I like the way you think.
What? You mean felons already voting in Washington is not legal?
This ruling constitutes Treason, and the judges who made it should be tried, convicted and punished accordingly. Since this is a Republic, there are limits to both Federal and Judicial power, and this court decision emphatically exceeds them.
They could have there own Congressional District.
On a previous thread on this subject I tried pumping this also.
Got only one taker.
Could be an interesting month if Fund’s timing is right.
Hi!
A quick perusal of posts will almost always explains a bizarre, inexplicable thread title.
The Ninth Circus. (yawn)
I just hope the civilized humans at SCOTUS hurry up and overturn their latest idiocy.
Thanks!
LH
How many convicts in prison are black muslims? Think it can’t happen? Man, we have got to stompon this one...
Understood.But you,unlike me,seem to have doubt as to the outcome of that review.
If SCOTUS agrees to hear the case.
++++++++++
They must get tired of the crap that comes out of the 9th, the most overturned federal court in the land. You would think by now these clowns would have been retired and replaced by people that are not walking around free for lack of funding for mental institutions.
One of the problems with felons is that one size fits all. There is no differentiation between a violent felony such as rape, aggravated assault, or murder with non-violent felonies when it comes to civil rights.
A person who kited a check in college in some states can be a convicted felon.
Non-violent felony convictions should have a sunset date on deprivation of any civil rights if the defendant is not convicted of any subsequent felony and it should be specified in the judgment and sentenced issued by the court.
I am in law enforcement and have no problem with this. The idea that all felonies should result in the same loss of rights is absurd. Not all felonies are equal and I have no problem with a 35 year old who did something stupid (that did not hurt another person) when they were 18 having the right to vote, possess a firearm, and/or run for office.
I know of many instances of people who did the crime, did the time, and have straightened themselves up. They have rehabilitated themselves and are productive members of society and we should recognize that constitutionally.
Violent felons? Forget about it.
Nah! Not only should thugs have the right to vote in prison, but also they should have the right to bear arms. /sarc
+++++++++++++++
Actually, thugs carry guns despite the law, if EVERYBODY was free to carry firearms, it would be the same as all non-felons being free to carry firearms. Firearms possession being against the law for felons is just a tool for prosecution against repeat offenders, and too often not pursued relentlessly.
Ooops - I meant to also say the idea of letting a prisoner in jail vote is dumb, dumb, dumb. They should not be allowed to vote if they are on probation/parole either for a felony.
Let them clearly demonstrate (again, in non-violent offenses) that they have straightened up and restore their rights.
Problem fixed. This is obviously being done for the purpose of getting more democratic voters on the books. As if Washington state needed that??
“I’m a convicted felon. I’ve had my voting rights restored. I’m a die-hard conservative.
So much for your stupid comment.”
I’m sure it was meant about the majority of said convicted felons in this case, and they would be black. We know where the majority of black votes go.
So, even if you are black, that was not to be a slap in your face.
BTW, welcome back to freedom, I hope you are making the most of it.
The only question is when?
Couldn't disagree more.To give you an idea of my age...I had a draft card.And although I've been around the block many more than a few times I've managed to live all those years without ever having been *accused* of a felony let alone being convicted of one.Crime is crime and has *many* consequences.Would I prefer to be a victim of check fraud rather than murder? Yah,obviously.But I don't want to be the victim of either.A US citizen who has ever,in fact,been guilty of a felony...violent or non-violent....has proven him/herself to be unworthy of some of the rights that we non-felons have.Including voting.
RATS want felons to vote...for obvious reasons.RATS want illegals to vote....for obvious reasons.RATS want dead people to vote...for obvious reasons.
I want none of these things to happen.....for obvious reasons.
[See article]
So much for your stupid assumption.
The case was first filed in Spokane in 1996 by Muhammad Shabazz Farrakhan
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.