Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
I have no problem with prisoners having the vote.
I do have a problem with the UK saying - no we aren't going to abide by that EU ruling, because then we cant complain when other countries don't abide by the rules.
I'm sorry, but I'll make no apologies for this
Pogle is awarded +5 Xeno Geek Points. CUK University Challenge Champions 2010 CUK University Challenge Champions 2012
I kind of see where you are comg from hamster chops.
However seeing as most other countries ignore half the EU rulings and the basis that they are effectively tulipe I really am not going to loose sleep about it.
but no prisoners should not get the vote becuase they are in prison becuase they have proved they are unable to live in a civilised society.
As was argued in the 2000 US presidential election, disenfranchisement can also be argued as racism in certain areas, due to the demographic of those more likely to be inside.
If Zimbabwe gives prisoners the right to vote, isn't it about time we did?
This is a personal view, but I'd prefer the UK to make its own mind up about it's own laws, where possible, rather than do something because someone else has.
And I'd be especially cautious of following Zimbabwe's lead on anything.
Last edited by Doggy Styles; 11 February 2011, 15:43.
Either walk away from the law completely, or stick to it. You can't have a government selectively choose which part of the legislation they want to enforce and which bits they want to stick two fingers up at.
Or actually, you can - you just can't expect to not get punished for it.
Ditto for prisoners ... they didn't break all the laws, just the one(s) that didn't suit them. So if it is good enough for the UK government to ignore the laws they don't like, why can't the people? Not a good precedent, is it?
Society has excluded them for the crimes they have committed. Surely that exclusion should mean they don't have the rights and freedoms to which they were previously entitled?
Which also means they should not have to pay tax on any income from shares or rented property they own while in prison.
Comment