Assuming gun rights are also restored, I support this. There is the “punishment ends” scenario and the “punishment never ends” scenario. If a punishment is determined for any given crime, when the punishment is served, the person should be restored to full citizen status, rather than having a pall hang over them for the rest of their lives.
That said, given that this kind of treatment means that violent people might be let back out into society, I would _strongly suggest_ that sentences are adapted in light of this treatment, and, in particular, strongly suggest that the sentence for people who repeatedly commit crimes, and especially violent crimes, receive life in prison, if not death, because they have shown that they are unlikely to ever be able to live normally within society ever again.
+1
See my #22 which says much the same thing.
While the knee-jerkers will go to town on you, let me state my agreement.
A person who has served his time should have all his rights restored, voting and gun rights included. The existence of a growing class of rump non-citizen citizens only further serves to detach the government from the will of the people and encourage it to proliferate even more laws to strip these rights.
If they’re rights, they’re rights. Citizens without rights are something no conservative should countenance.
I agree with you that, having paid one’s debt to society, rights must be restored.
As to your second paragraph, violent people are going to be let back into society whether their rights are restored or not. Repeat offenders already get enhanced sentences, so I don’t understand your point.