Instigator / Con
Points: 34

Should Prisoners Be Allowed To Vote

Finished

The voting period has ended

After 10 votes the winner is ...
Speedrace
Debate details
Publication date
Last update
Category
Politics
Time for argument
One day
Voting system
Open voting
Voting period
One week
Point system
Four points
Rating mode
Rated
Characters per argument
10,000
Contender / Pro
Points: 70
Description
You start first!
Round 1
Published:
Thank you for accepting this debate.

You break the law, So you don't get to make the law. An offender has been sent to prison for a reason, And that reason is that he/she has broken the law. Their best interests weren't obeying or cooperating with the law, They aren't law-abiding citizens, So, Therefore, They are unfit to judge a reasonable vote that will benefit their nation. Prisons should focus on making prisoners realise their wrongdoing and regret their decisions. It shouldn't gift them the feeling of dignity, That should only occur when they have served their time, Hopefully learnt from their previous actions and released. That's when they will become a functioning and responsible member of society.

Voting is a privilege, Not a right. This privilege is withdrawn from you when your no longer a functions member of society when you're a burden to the laws of the nation your staying in. If prisoners could vote, They could possibly vote for corrupt leaders or bad laws. For example, A candidate states, "If you vote for me, I will produce nicer prisons. " Why would we want this? Would you want a murder to have the privilege of voting for the leader of our nation? Would you want prisoners to receive the exact same privileges, Benefits and responsibilities as an upstanding citizen? If so, Then what's the purpose of prison?

We have certain restrictions upon certain people. We don't let people under the age of 18 to vote, Why? Because they don't have the judgment yet. We don't let some people who have mental disabilities, Such as autism to vote, Why? The exact same reason for my other example, Because we don't trust their judgment until they reach a certain age. Its the same with prisoners. They lack the judgment (obvious by their previous crime) to provide a reasonable vote. , Therefore prisoners shouldn't be allowed to vote.

Published:
  1. Inmates are U.S. citizens (besides immigrants).
  2. U.S. citizens have the right to vote.
  3. Therefore, immigrants should be allowed to vote.

P1

The Supreme Court has already ruled that citizenship cannot be taken upon incarceration. [1] Therefore, regardless of what they are, inmates are American citizens.

P2

The 14th amendment grants the right to vote to all men and women born or naturalized in the United States that at or above the age of 18.

P3

Since inmates (except for non-naturalized residents and minors) meet the requirements listed above, it only logically follows that they should be allowed to vote. They still have almost all of the other rights that U.S. citizens have.
Round 2
Forfeited
Published:
You break the law, So you don't get to make the law.
Voting is not "making" the law. 

Their best interests weren't obeying or cooperating with the law, They aren't law-abiding citizens, So, Therefore, They are unfit to judge a reasonable vote that will benefit their nation
Where is the evidence that they are unfit? Let's say that someone has consistently voted for 30 years, but in a fit of anger they one day kill a person. Is their capacity to vote and make rational decision now suddenly changed based off of one mistake?

Voting is a privilege, Not a right. This privilege is withdrawn from you when your no longer a functions member of society when you're a burden to the laws of the nation your staying in.
I beg to differ. Prisoners are still citizens, and as citizens they have the right to vote. This doesn't change simply because they were caught doing X crime. What if someone is in jail for not paying their speeding ticket because they didn't have enough money? Are they suddenly unfit to vote? No.

Would you want a murder to have the privilege of voting for the leader of our nation?
What separates someone who seriously thinks of murdering and someone who actually does? How is the former any more fit to vote than the latter?

Would you want prisoners to receive the exact same privileges, Benefits and responsibilities as an upstanding citizen?
Voting is not equivalent to "the exact same privileges, Benefits and responsibilities" that upstanding citizens have. It is one right.

Its the same with prisoners. They lack the judgment (obvious by their previous crime) to provide a reasonable vote. , Therefore prisoners shouldn't be allowed to vote.
Perhaps if their crime entails some type of mental defect, then sure. However, that is not the case for the majority of prisoners.


Added:
"Amendment XIII Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction. Section 2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation."
This is the thirteenth amendment. It ended slavery in the civil war. But it says slavery is still legal if you commit a crime. I do not agree with this
https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/amendmentxiii
#4
Added:
I do not agree with this. But prisoners are not USA citizens they are slaves.
the thirteenth amendment abolished slavery except if you have committed a crime.
"Constitution abolished slavery and involuntary servitude, except as punishment for a crime. In Congress,"
Slavery is only allowed in the usa if you have committed a crime.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thirteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
The thirteenth amendment ended slavery in the civil war except if you commit a crime then you can legally become a slave. I do not agree with this
#3
Added:
Depends on the criminal. I wouldn’t let a felon convict vote.
#2
Added:
if they like say behave for like 5 years then their record should be expunged completely
#1
#10
Criterion Con Tie Pro Points
Better arguments 3 points
Better sources 2 points
Better spelling and grammar 1 point
Better conduct 1 point
Reason:
FF
#9
Criterion Con Tie Pro Points
Better arguments 3 points
Better sources 2 points
Better spelling and grammar 1 point
Better conduct 1 point
Reason:
forfeit
#8
Criterion Con Tie Pro Points
Better arguments 3 points
Better sources 2 points
Better spelling and grammar 1 point
Better conduct 1 point
Reason:
Forfeit :/
#7
Criterion Con Tie Pro Points
Better arguments 3 points
Better sources 2 points
Better spelling and grammar 1 point
Better conduct 1 point
Reason:
Con forfeited 1/2 the rounds. That's bad conduct!
#6
Criterion Con Tie Pro Points
Better arguments 3 points
Better sources 2 points
Better spelling and grammar 1 point
Better conduct 1 point
Reason:
A forfeit leads to only one side giving rebuttals which means Pro's arguments went unchallenged. 1 out 2 rounds were forfeited which is bad conduct.
#5
Criterion Con Tie Pro Points
Better arguments 3 points
Better sources 2 points
Better spelling and grammar 1 point
Better conduct 1 point
Reason:
1/2 FF that's poor conduct
#4
Criterion Con Tie Pro Points
Better arguments 3 points
Better sources 2 points
Better spelling and grammar 1 point
Better conduct 1 point
Reason:
Full forfeit
#3
Criterion Con Tie Pro Points
Better arguments 3 points
Better sources 2 points
Better spelling and grammar 1 point
Better conduct 1 point
Reason:
Con ff half of the debate, that's poor conduct!
Likewise, due to the insufficient argument by Con and the fact that Pro's case was left undisputed, I have no other choice than to award the argument point to Pro.
#2
Criterion Con Tie Pro Points
Better arguments 3 points
Better sources 2 points
Better spelling and grammar 1 point
Better conduct 1 point
Reason:
With the FF pro's case was left unchallenged.
#1
Criterion Con Tie Pro Points
Better arguments 3 points
Better sources 2 points
Better spelling and grammar 1 point
Better conduct 1 point
Reason:
1/2 forfeit, neither side convinced me