The Pros And Cons Of Disenfranchisement

1068 Words5 Pages
There is an appraise of 5.9 million individuals (as of 2016) with a crime conviction that will be banned from voting in the presidential decision (Toth). These individuals are incapable to vote, which is called disenfranchisement. Studies have demonstrated that states make up their claim laws on criminal disenfranchisement. As of now, four states disenfranchise for life those convicted of felonies, and seven states forever disenfranchise those with at least some kind of criminal convictions. Maine and Vermont are the only two states to permit those sentenced of violations to vote without confinements (Bernd). There is a lot of debate on whether criminals should be able to vote or not. In truth, they should since the right to vote is a birth right for all citizens that are born in the United States, and voting is just an opinion. Although this right is taken for granted by many, and is worked out by far too few, these individuals should not be prohibited from voting since everybody can state their opinions.
Felons have paid their debt to society and have received their punishments for whatever the cause was for them being thrown in jail. All of their privileges and rights that were taken away from them should be restored. These efforts to block ex-felons to vote are unfair, undemocratic, and politically or racially motivated. Others who disagree may say they have shown poor judgement and should not be trusted with a vote. This is false because no one is perfect and everyone
Open Document