Trigger Warning. Byrd's lynching-by-dragging

[sheshe2]

James Byrd Jr. (May 2, 1949 – June 7, 1998) was a African American man who was murdered by three white supremacists in Jasper, Texas, on June 7, 1998. Shawn Berry, Lawrence Brewer, and John King dragged Byrd for three miles behind a pickup truck along an asphalt road. Byrd, who remained conscious throughout most of his ordeal, was killed about halfway through the dragging when his body hit the edge of a culvert, severing his right arm and head. The murderers drove on for another ​1 1⁄2 miles (2.4 km) before dumping his torso in front of a black cemetery in Jasper.[1][2] Byrd's lynching-by-dragging gave impetus to passage of a Texas hate-crimes law. It later led to the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act, commonly known as the Matthew Shepard Act, which became federal law in 2009.[3]

The motive for the crime has been identified as racial hatred.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_James_Byrd_Jr.

John William KingWas the second to be executed for Byrds dragging death. A most heinous crime. One is serving a life sentence.

He was dragged behind a speeding truck for THREE miles and dies he died half way after his arm and head were severed.

There seems to be conflicting decision with our candidates. Some want a paroled felon to have voting rights. I fully agree that anyone that has served their time have a right to vote. Sorry, a convicted felon gave up that right who is now serving time. Some are serving life sentences for the most grievous crimes.

Sorry, they do NOT deserve a right to vote while serving the time for their crime. They took away their victims right to vote by murdering them. Why should they have more rights than their victim.

[Dennis Donovan]

1. Byrd's family opposed the execution.

...because they're real Christians. Just saying...

[DemocratSinceBirth]

2. You can oppose the death penalty.

You can oppose the death penalty and also oppose incarcerated murderers, terrorists, and rapists right to vote. I would also oppose weekend furloughs for them and premium cable. I'm sure his survivors would agree with me.

[Dennis Donovan]

3. That's a sad position to take...

...because you're not seeing the bigger pic.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

7. What's the bigger picture? It's a gimmick.

X- I'm a real progressive. I favor weekend furloughs for all incarcerated offenders.
Y- That's absurd.
X You're a regressive.

[sheshe2]

23. ;)

[NYMinute]

14. This nuance is lost on some n/t

[DemocratSinceBirth]

16. It's a matter of drawing lines.

I am sure there are rights I would accord prisoners others wouldn't and there are rights others would accord prisoners I wouldn't. I believe prisoners in sub-tropical and desert climates should have air conditioned cells. I assure you that's more important to prisoners in desert and sub-tropical climates than voting.

[sheshe2]

5. What does that have to do with a felons right to vote?

It was his son only that opposed his execution.

[Dennis Donovan]

6. you replied to the wrong post.

[sheshe2]

9. No I did not.

[Dennis Donovan]

10. whatever...

you did because I wrote about the death penalty. Not the right to vote.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

13. We have so many 9th Amendment rights, many more important than voting.

Prisoners surrender most of them but the worst of them should retain their right to vote. It doesn't make sense.

[sheshe2]

15. Guess you did not read MY post that you responded to.

Here is a snip

There seems to be conflicting decision with our candidates. Some want a paroled felon to have voting rights. I fully agree that anyone that has served their time have a right to vote. Sorry, a convicted felon gave up that right who is now serving time. Some are serving life sentences for the most grievous crimes.

Sorry, they do NOT deserve a right to vote while serving the time for their crime. They took away their victims right to vote by murdering them. Why should they have more rights than their victim.

I wasn't talking about the death penalty. I was talking about a heinous crime, by a criminal that some candidates want to be allowed to vote.

[dalton99a]

4. "I have no regrets. No, I'd do it all over again."

Lawrence Russell Brewer (March 13, 1967 – September 21, 2011) was a white supremacist, who prior to Byrd's murder, had served a prison sentence for drug possession and burglary. He was paroled in 1991. After violating his parole conditions in 1994, Brewer was returned to prison. According to his court testimony, he joined a white supremacist prison gang with King in order to safeguard himself from other inmates.[25] Brewer and King became friends in the Beto Unit prison.[6] A psychiatrist testified that Brewer did not appear repentant for his crimes. Brewer was ultimately convicted and sentenced to death.[26] Brewer, TDCJ#999327,[27] was on death row at the Polunsky Unit,[6] but he was executed in the Huntsville Unit on September 21, 2011.[28] The day before his execution, Brewer expressed no remorse for his crime, as he told KHOU 11 News in Houston: "As far as any regrets, no, I have no regrets. No, I'd do it all over again, to tell you the truth."[29]

Before his execution, Brewer ordered a last meal that included two chicken-fried steaks smothered in gravy with sliced onions; a triple-patty bacon cheeseburger; a cheese omelet with ground beef, tomatoes, onions, bell peppers and jalapeños; a bowl of fried okra with ketchup; one pound of barbecued meat with half a loaf of white bread; three fully loaded fajitas; a meat-lover's pizza; one pint of Blue Bell vanilla ice cream; a slab of peanut-butter fudge with crushed peanuts; and three root beers. When the meal was presented, he told officials that he was not hungry and as a result he did not eat any of it. The meal was discarded, prompting State Senator John Whitmire to ask Texas prison officials to end the 87-year-old tradition of giving last meals to condemned inmates. The prison agency's executive director responded by stating that the practice had been terminated effective immediately.[30]

John William King on death row

[DemocratSinceBirth]

12. Making laws for specific persons is poor legislating.

However making laws for categories of offenders is good legislation and capital offenders, i.e. murderers and terrorists don't get to vote while in the hoosegow.

[Haggis for Breakfast]

8. I cannot wrap my head around the notion that ANYONE in prison should be accorded the right to vote.

This would be like saying that Charles Manson, Jeffrey Dahmer, John Wayne Gacy, Mattias Reyes and Dylann Roof - all responsible for heinous crimes - should be permitted to have a voice in the world of civilized society.

When Nikolas Cruz is finally put in prison (if Florida doesn't sentence him to death, which I would prefer), he does not deserve to have the right to vote alongside of the family members of the 14 children and 3 adults he slaughtered in cold blood in Parkland.

[sheshe2]

11. I can't wrap my head around it either, Haggis.

Plus the other point I am trying to make is that fugg the criminal and his rights...WHAT ABOUT THE VICTIMS RIGHTS.

BS wants them to vote while in prison. I want them to have that right when they are paroled and only then.

[Haggis for Breakfast]

21. That's my take, too, sheshe.

Once - and only once - they have paid their debt and served their time, should they be able to re-gain the right to vote. Prison is not a picnic, but hopefully the punishment fits the crime --- we all know that that isn't always the case, and I'm not going to address that here, but once a person is paroled, then they should not be prohibited from being able to vote, like some states are trying to do.

[sheshe2]

25. Exactly, Haggis.

I get what you are saying.

We have a lot of work to do with the criminal justice system and giving child murderers and rapists, hate crimes, domestic terrorists and mass murderers the right to vote is ridiculous.

Thanks.

[babylonsister]

22. I'm right there with you. nt

[Hassin Bin Sober]

26. the fact is we are out of step with the rest of civilized society

But we are Murica! Home of the largest prison population and leader in minority voter disenfranchisement!

FULL HUMAN BEINGS

An argument for incarcerated voter enfranchisement


ONLY IN AMERICA



https://www.peoplespolicyproject.org/projects/prisoner-voting/


Many countries fully recognize the right of incarcerated citizens to vote. Today, 26 European nations at least partially protect their incarcerated citizens’ right to vote, while 18 countries grant prisoners the vote regardless of the offense. In Germany, Norway, and Portugal, only crimes that specifically target the “integrity of the state” or “constitutionally protected democratic order” result in disenfranchisement. The European Court of Human Rights has forcefully defended the voter franchise, going so far as to condemn in 2005 Britain’s blanket ban on voting rights for prisoners, calling it a violation of human rights. In December of last year, after 12 years of resistance to the ECHR’s decision, the UK partially relented by allowing prisoners on temporary release and at home under curfew to cast their ballots.

Even our Canadian neighbors acknowledge the right of people in prison to have their voices heard at election time. In South Africa, meanwhile, prisoners have participated in the democratic process since 1999, when their Constitutional Court declared that “The universality of the franchise is important not only for nationhood and democracy. The vote of each and every citizen is a badge of dignity and of personhood.”

Despite this growing international consensus, however, the United States—the self-proclaimed lighthouse of democracy—significantly abridges the voter franchise. Only in Maine and Vermont can prisoners participate in elections; for the vast majority of the 1.5 million people in federal and state prisons, democracy remains a spectator sport. All told, less than 4,000 prisoners have the right to vote. It is time for this to change.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Felony_disenfranchisement#In_other_countries
Other European countries

Several European countries permit disenfranchisement by special court order, including France, Germany (reinstated after 2–5 years) and the Netherlands.[102] In several others, no disenfranchisements due to criminal convictions exist. Moreover, many European countries encourage people to vote, such as by making pre-voting in other places than the respective election locales easily accessible. This often includes possibilities for prisoners to pre-vote from the prison itself. This is the case for example in Finland.[103]

In Germany the law calls on prisons to encourage prisoners to vote. Only those convicted of electoral fraud and crimes undermining the "democratic order", such as treason, are barred from voting while in prison.[104]


In other countries


Most democracies give convicted criminals the same voting rights as other citizens.

In Taiwan the abrogation of political rights is a form of punishment used in sentencing, available only for some crimes or along with a sentence of death or imprisonment for life. Rights that are suspended in such a sentence include the right to vote and to take public office, as well as the rights to political expression, assembly, association, and protest. In China, there is a similar punishment of Deprivation of Political Rights.

In New Zealand, people who are in prison are not entitled to enroll while they are in prison. Persons who are convicted of electoral offenses in the past 3 years cannot vote or stand for office. In November 2018, the New Zealand Supreme Court ruled that such restrictions are inconsistent with the nation's Bill of Rights.[113]

Many countries allow inmates to vote, including Canada,[114][115] Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Israel, Kenya, Netherlands, Norway, Peru, Poland, Romania, Serbia, Sweden, and Zimbabwe.[citation needed]

On 8 December 2008, Leung Kwok Hung (Long Hair), member of Hong Kong's popularly elected Legislative Council (LegCo), and two prison inmates, successfully challenged disenfranchisement provisions in the LegCo electoral laws. The court found blanket disenfranchisement of prisoners to be in violation of Article 26 of the Basic Law and Article 21 of the Bill of Rights and the denial to persons in custody of access to polling stations as against the law. The government introduced a bill to repeal the provisions of the law disenfranchising persons convicted of crimes (even those against the electoral system) as well as similar ones found in other electoral laws, and it made arrangements for polling stations to be set up at detention centers and prisons. LegCo passed the bill, and it took effect from 31 October 2009, even though no major elections were held until the middle of 2011.

[Haggis for Breakfast]

30. Can YOU wrap your head around the shattered families in this country

who have lost loved ones to the outrageous daily gun violence that permeates this nation ?

Yes, this country is out of step. The amount of guns in our society is unprecedented and "out of step," when compared with all of the other nations you sited.

This is not exactly a level playing field here, is it ?

Your argument is disingenuous at best, spurious and deceitful at worst.

[still_one]

27. Let me take it to an extreme case. Let's assume Trump is indicted, convicted, and sent to prison

DO WE REALLY WANT HIM TO VOTE?

[backtoblue]

17. Voting rights upon release from prison only.

Leaders need to focus in prison reform and establishing voting rights to those released.

Note:. Opposing voting for inmates should not be looked at like new rights are being taken away. Those rights are already gone once you are in prison.

[NYMinute]

18. It is so true

Some crimes are so heinous that those people's judgment will forever remain questionable and they should not have a right to vote.

[drmeow]

19. The argument I've seen in favor

"a government that denies its prisoners the right to vote is a government that now has an extremely vested interest in jailing its political opposition"

For every John William King, how many black men are wrongfully convicted? https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/07/us/wrongful-convictions-race-exoneration.html

Perhaps there is a middle ground somewhere?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

20. There is a middle ground

Let non violent offenders vote.

[sheshe2]

28. An argument against.

John William King took away James Byrds Jr life from him. Dragged him one and a half miles before his head and arm was severed from his body then dragged for another one and a half miles.

He took his life and his right to vote.

I have said many times here that it is not voting rights that need to be looked at it is the criminal just system.

See Ferguson.

https://www.aclu-mo.org/en/news/long-term-costs-missouris-school-prison-pipeline

Students who are targeted for unequal discipline are removed from an educational setting and funneled into the juvenile and criminal justice system. Students who are subject to unfair and frequent discipline are more likely to drop out of high school and come into contact with law enforcement.

Many later find themselves in prison, diminishing their lifetime economic opportunities and robbing their communities of their social contributions. The effects can last for generations and only perpetuate cycles in poverty and inequality.

Missouri is one of the school-to-prison pipeline’s worst contributors.

In our October 2017 report, “From School to Prison: Missouri's Pipeline of Injustice,” we reported that Black students are more likely to receive suspensions than White students. This summer, we took a look at the newest data and learned that things have only become worse. Black students are now five times more likely to be suspended than White students overall. Black preschoolers are more than four times as likely to be suspended compared to White preschoolers -- Missouri gives multiple out-of-school suspensions to Black preschoolers than in 44 other states.

The effects of this pipeline have both a human cost and a financial cost.

We will explore the real consequences of the school-to-prison pipeline by following two Missouri students: one, who finishes his education and builds a successful career, and another, who is expelled from school and finds herself in prison.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

24. That's a hard case to defend, no doubt about it.

The only thing I can tell myself is that there are people who have done equally terrible things, even worse things -- as if there's a reliable scale -- who do have the right to vote simply because they have not been caught or convicted. And in the end, I think society gains more overall by restoring the right to vote to all incarcerated people, even John William King, just as society gains more by abolishing the death penalty for all people convicted on capital charges, even John William King.

[IndianaDave]

29. THIS is what brings tears to my eyes.

The racial hatred which has been with us from the very beginning of our nation sometimes rises to the surface. It always hurts and disgusts me.

As an old white guy, I need to say that -- even in the 1950's -- both my father (who had Black friends with whom he spent many evenings) and my mother, who washed my mouth out with soap for repeating (around age 8) the N word I had heard from my friends in the neighborhood, both modeled unqualified acceptance of anyone who was "different." They taught me to respect every person, regardless of race (we're all human, aren't we!), orientation (as Mom said, "It's not their fault they feel that way." Remember, it was the 1950's), disabilities, intelligence level, and so forth. We were supposed to respect every single person. No exceptions. The thing is, I have never found a good reason to reject their reasoning. So, when Civil Rights became a hot political issue in the 1960's, it made perfect sense for me to march to promote the passage of the Civil Rights Act.

Consequently, I have no way of making sense of people who lash out with hatred or violence toward African Americans, gay people, transgender people, immigrants -- you name it. This bullshit always baffles me. Trump intentionally elicits the worst tendencies of human beings. And his political party tacitly supports every egregious act he commits. Therefore, I am proud to be a Democrat. Every one of our candidates has a much more noble perspective and goal. And, although I have a favorite, I will support, contribute to, and vote for our Democratic Nominee, whoever that may become.

Finally, if you're still reading, I am absolutely opposed to capital punishment / the death penalty. Killing someone in my name to prove that evil is evil is both illogical and indefensible.

However, once a person has served his or her time for criminal behavior, he or she should regain the right to vote. While serving time, it doesn't seem fair to me. And fairness is key.

[randr]

31. I am against the death penalty, however

In this case I would have chosen the perps be given the same treatment as they dished out.

[summer_in_TX]

32. In Florida, voting rights will be restored to many but not all offenders.

They must have completed all of their sentence and any parole or release conditions and cannot have a conviction for a violent crime. That was able to pass as a ballot initiative in the red state of Florida.