Donate SIGN UP

Have The Echr Heard Of Common Sense?

Avatar Image
ToraToraTora | 10:37 Tue 10th Feb 2015 | News
47 Answers
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31356895
Who in their right mind can possibly conclude that prisoners should have the vote? Only the European court of Anti British c0bbl3rs! (ECABC)!
Gravatar

Answers

21 to 40 of 47rss feed

First Previous 1 2 3 Next Last

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by ToraToraTora. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Well as Dave says" We are all in it(stir) together. So no exceptions. What happens to our cherished democracy if it allows Council tax evaders a vote but rapists do not have it. You start that little prison hierarchy going and the prisoners will be demanding a union to decide which prison is next on the riot list.
The right to vote" will allow and assist them to rejoin society."PMSL. They had the right to vote before entering prison but they didn't assist society then.Their vote is irrelevant. If you can't do the crime. Don't do the crime!
I stand to be corrected here but I thought that after one of the judgements of this european court concerning the same issue the Houses of Parliament had a debate and stated categorically that prisoners were not to be given the vote. So we have a stand-off between our elected government and a bunch of judges, some of whom are sourced from various less than democratic regimes. So who is to prevail - I know where my opinion lies.
If you can't do the time. Don't do the crime. You know what I meant :-)
A council tax evader who happens to be not in jail when the election takes place will have the vote
As will a rapist who happens not to be in jail at the same time as a matter of fact.
Something tells me prison hierarchies already exist
I think that ......err that is what I wrote.
"They had the right to vote before entering prison" "They" being council tax evaders and rapists. Now they are in prison they no longer get the vote along with their favourite spliffs and mobile phones etc.
// The number of former servicemen in prison or on probation or parole is now more than double the total British deployment in Afghanistan, according to a new survey. An estimated 20,000 veterans are in the criminal justice system, with 8,500 behind bars, almost one in 10 of the prison population. //

So you can risk your life for this country, but not be allowed to vote if you end up in the nick.
Common sense has little to do with it . Politicians are primarily concerned with getting elected and playing to the bleeding heart brigade is a simple way of getting a few more votes. Similarly dropping the voting age gathers in votes from those with no experience of life but are influenced by their idealism and their environment. Most people under the age of 25 vote like their parents . They are voting with their heart not their head. For that reason there are hundreds of 'safe seats ' and it takes decades before there are any major changes.
Common sense indeed should not come into it. It's a legal issue, where legal bods advise.
But because, as you say, politicians are more interested in votes as you say then I suspect the EHCR judgment will be ignored :-)
Some servicemen were risking their life whilst serving in Afghanistan and ended up in the nick for doing so. No howls of outrage from the wringing hands lefties there though. No exceptions should be made for prisoners. I know for a fact that our local prison and probably all other prisons allow their inmates to light up pretty much wherever they like . God forbid if a prison officer or civilian worker( as is my daughter in law) is seen lighting up within the prison confines. Bit like the members bar of the H of C really. Certain privileges for some and not for others. Fast track treatment to NHS departments that others have to join a waiting list or go private. Heating,food and laundry paid for. They get enough plus more without needing a further privilege or right.
// Some servicemen were risking their life whilst serving in Afghanistan and ended up in the nick for doing //

No they didn't.
// Some servicemen were risking their life whilst serving in Afghanistan and ended up in the nick for doing //

What total nonsense!!
Gromit
Why don't you put it a slightly different way?
All ex servicemen should be exempted from prison if they commit a crime because it would mean they lose the right to vote!!
I would imagine that most ex servicemen would not have ended up in prison in the first place if they had been offered support after demob having experienced the horrors they saw. Loads of ex Falklands vets turned to alcoholism and crime. After the trauma some suffered their was no assistance for them and it is a crying shame that their life followed that direction after serving their country. That is another topic.
I think the point is that an individual having a representative in parliament is considered a fundamental right of a civilised democracy, not a privilege to be taken away. Whereas the amount of difference it makes is not relevant to the principle, it is relevant to the amount of fuss made. If it makes next to no difference then the principle has, presumably, next to no importance.
retro//Sgt Nightingale had planned to fight the charge of illegally possessing the 9mm Glock.//

//Sgt Blackman faced a court martial after video footage of the incident was found on a laptop computer. He admitted shooting a Taliban fighter who had already been hit by a round from an Apache helicopter gunship. But the the court martial panel didn't accept his claim that the man was already dead when he shot him. He was sentenced to life imprisonment.//

Sorry neither of these offences were for fighting in Afghanistan, they were offences committed "whilst in" Afghanistan. Soldiers still need to obey laws, even when fighting a war abroad!!


Gromit and Ratter
Another one to complete the trinity. How many more do you want before you agree that what I stated was not nonsense. These guys served in Afghan and ended up in the nick be it civilian or military!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2049987/Gurkha-beheaded-Taliban-soldier-Afghanistan-battle-cleared-return-duty.html
//But because, as you say, politicians are more interested in votes as you say then I suspect the EHCR judgment will be ignored :-) //

So democracy will win.
Ratter.
Why were they in Afghanistan for a sun tan, a bit of recreation?
They were committed whilst fighting or as a result of having been fighting in Afghanistan and were imprisoned for their trouble. This is going off the topic again as to " a prisoner's right to vote" not Afghanistan.
Retrocop,

Mr Blackman was not sentenced to life for serving in Aghanistan.

He was sentenced for murdering someone.
//But because, as you say, politicians are more interested in votes as you say then I suspect the EHCR judgment will be ignored :-) //

So democracy will win.

Yes indeed and that is good, however it is rather a pity if politicians (and I am sure there must be more than a few) who don't believe in the point blank principle of prison=no vote, merely go along with what they perceive to be public opinion rather than doing what they believe to be right. If the people still don't like it they can get rid of them. That is what is good about democracy. What's bad about it of course is when politicians follow the perceived will of the majority for their own benefit rather than anything else.

21 to 40 of 47rss feed

First Previous 1 2 3 Next Last

Do you know the answer?

Have The Echr Heard Of Common Sense?

Answer Question >>

Related Questions

Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.