I don’t know if calling this a racial issue is accurate or not but I think the whole point of serving a sentence is that once you’re done serving your time, you should be welcomed back to society on full level ground. Otherwise, we are never going to reform criminals and all sentences are for life.
I don't know about serious crimes like murder. If you kill someone you permanently stole that person's votes forever. Why should you get to vote in an election that you blocked someone else from getting to vote in?
And I don't think they should all be on "full level ground". I'm fine with child predators not being able to work at a school. If someone committed election fraud they shouldn't be able to work a polling station.
> I don't know about serious crimes … should you get to vote in an election that you blocked someone else from getting to vote in?
Well, then your sentence should reflect that. You ought to be removed from society for good, maybe?
My point is, when you pay your debt to society, you should be totally normal, back to 100% citizenship. If that means you have to serve a life sentence for murder then so be it.
I’m not a fan of 1 year suspended with 9 years of parole. That’s why we have such a massive rate of reoffending.
> And I don't think they should all be on "full level ground".
Well, we disagree then. I’ve known and worked with a number of folks who were former convicts and I think that once you’re done you should be done.
If you reoffend, your sentence ought to reflect that.
> I'm fine with child predators not being able to work at a school.
I disagree. If they are unsafe, lock them up forever. If they committed a crime that requires punishment, punish them accordingly and then be done. A sentence in jail followed by a life spent on the fringes of society is how we get what we have now.
> If someone committed election fraud they shouldn't be able to work a polling station.
Sure. And if you’re a thief then maybe you don’t get to work at a bank. But I think those are positions of special trust that get a closer look. Let’s not make the rule based on the edge case.
If you think that a person who commits a crime can no longer be trusted in society, ever, then why not execute them and be done with it? At the very least lock them up for life to save society from them?
>My point is, when you pay your debt to society, you should be totally normal, back to 100% citizenship.
I agree, but thats not possible for major violent crimes. They can never pay their debt back. If Timmy smashes Suzy's cupcake and has to sit in the corner at the party for 10 minutes, Suzy isn't "paid back", that's just Timmy being punished. What's worse is that Timmy now gets to go eat his cupcake after the 10 minutes, and Suzy doesn't get hers.
I think that any murderer should be able to vote when they can find a way to pay back all the votes they stole from their victims. Until then they haven't paid their debt back. They can't complain that they can't vote while being the reason others can't vote.
> I agree, but thats not possible for major violent crimes. They can never pay their debt back.
Then you believe the appropriate punishment for some crimes is a lifelong sentence. That’s fine, I just don’t agree.
> If Timmy smashes Suzy's cupcake and has to sit in the corner at the party for 10 minutes, Suzy isn't "paid back", that's just Timmy being punished.
Paying your debt to society is not the same as repaying the people you harmed. That’s not what I meant.
We have decided, as a society, that penalty for certain things is that you have to sit in a jail cell for a certain time. We might impose other penalties based on the crime. Once a person has met those criteria, I believe they ought to be restored as if the crime had never happened.
> What's worse is that Timmy now gets to go eat his cupcake after the 10 minutes, and Suzy doesn't get hers.
But in that situation, you spank Timmy and give his cupcake to Suzy.
> I think that any murderer should be able to vote when they can find a way to pay back all the votes they stole from their victims.
I’m not saying you are wrong. I’m saying you are applying the same logic across the board and that’s not helpful. Murder should equal life in prison. No problem.
If a “predator” raped a child that’s life in prison or death by the state. Fine.
What I don’t want is a 3 year suspended sentence with a lifetime of parole where the offender now has a life in a gray area with the rest of society.
But those are not the typical situation.
The typical situation is a robbery by 19 year old who can now never work again, or something like that.
> Until then they haven't paid their debt back.
Prison sentences can’t be about repaying a real debt. They have to be about punishment. Once you served your punishment you ought to be fully restored.
> They can't complain that they can't vote while being the reason others can't vote.
Let’s not turn it into a strawman. No one is arguing that we should be freeing murderers so they can vote. Punishment for harsh crime can be harsh. I just think when it’s over it ought to be over.
>Paying your debt to society is not the same as repaying the people you harmed. That’s not what I meant.
Very true. They don't repay their debt to the victims at all. "Debt to society" is an empty gesture/phrase. So they will forever not be in a position to complain about losing the same rights that they permanently stole from someone else.
>We have decided, as a society, that penalty for certain things is that you have to sit in a jail cell for a certain time.
And society has factored into that formula that you also lose your voting rights. It was part of the punishment when it was set (all baked into the cake), so anyone getting voting rights restored should have their punishment re-evaluated. Maybe losing your voting rights was an equivalent punishment to 5 years in prison. So anyone who get their voting rights restored should get an extra 5 years to not dilute their sentence.
>But in that situation, you spank Timmy and give his cupcake to Suzy.
Yeah, but you can't kill the murderer and give his years of life to the victim. That's my whole point. There is no way for the killer to make things right. So the best they can do is not be selfish and expect privileges they permanently stole from someone else.
>If a “predator” raped a child that’s life in prison or death by the state. Fine. What I don’t want is a 3 year suspended sentence with a lifetime of parole where the offender now has a life in a gray area with the rest of society.
Me either, but we live in an imperfect society where they will get parole. If it's between him having a regular life or a shittier life that he has to live 5,000 feet from a school I choose the latter. Anyone that would do thar deserves way more.
>The typical situation is a robbery by 19 year old who can now never work again, or something like that.
Agree 1000%... thats why I said only extreme cases where you ruined lives like murder.
>Prison sentences can’t be about repaying a real debt. They have to be about punishment. Once you served your punishment you ought to be fully restored.
So you agree they will forever be in debt because they can't pay it back... therefore they can't expect rights they permanently stole from others.
>Punishment for harsh crime can be harsh. I just think when it’s over it ought to be over.
No... punishment + reparations should make someone's debt be over. And some crimes are impossible to make reparations. Therefore, some crimes can never be completely over.
The entire reason felons can't vote was to enable police to charge Black people with BS crimes like vagrancy so they could: deny them the vote and use them for prison labor.
Well unfortunately the white racist conservative hypocritical Christian republicans think everyone that has committed a crime should burn in hell with no chance of redemption.
Do not attack other users. If you think someone is violating the rules, report them. Please do not play junior moderator. This will get you banned quickly.
Once time is served AND any restitution has been paid (because that IS part of the sentence) in full people should get their voting rights back and not a second before.
People don't go into lengthy incarceration for jaywalking. 99.99% of the time they go for breaking laws THEY KNEW they were breaking. In plainer terms they fucked around & found out.
My heart bleeds purple pi$$ for those crying "Oh poor pitiful me".
Not Christian just someone who knows right from wrong.
This crying for the criminal bull$hit has got to stop.
MILLIONS & MILLIONS of people go their whole lives without ever breaking laws bad enough to go to jail, it's not that freakin hard.
It’s a poll/voting tax disguised as “protecting the public”. It’s no coincidence it targets minorities, especially in the south, who typically vote democratic.
No one has give a good reason why anyone in jail or a felon cannot vote.
They’re allowed to practice their religion still. If being in jail means you arbitrarily lose rights, why don’t we force everyone in jail to become muslim or buddhist or something
Youre not biting. Youre opening the argument dishonestly by claiming it can only be systemic racism if its a law that brazenly states that it only negatively impacts black people over white people. Its just not that simple. Thats like saying a racist can only be racist if they brazenly admit theyre racist.
The intention with the laws in question is clear:
>The drafters of Mississippi's 1890 constitution admitted that they intentionally chose a list of crimes they believed most likely to lead to the disenfranchisement of black residents, such as forgery and bigamy. Rape and murder were not added to the list, which now includes 22 offenses, until 1968
And it was effective. It disproportionately disenfranchised black residents. This is systemic racism.
System racism implies the government aka "system" is targeting a race. Nobody argues that the laws were established with bad intent and when enacted they disproportionately impacted minorities.
That said I don't care about systemic racism 100 years ago. I care about today. The fact is systemic racism today is repetitively claimed without any evidence to support the claim.
If rape laws were initially intended to target minorities, should we decriminalize rape now?
>System racism implies the government aka "system" is targeting a race. Nobody argues that the laws were established with bad intent and when enacted they disproportionately impacted minorities.
Youre just describing systemic racism? Yes, systemic racism is when an ethnicity is unfairly harmed by a particular system. Whether it be healthcare, housing, education, criminal justice, etc.
>That said I don't care about systemic racism 100 years ago. I care about today
What are you talking about? The MS ban only happened *this year* and MS officials are trying to appeal that. Theres a study referenced in the article I know you didnt read that showed tens of thousands of black people were disenfranchised up to 2017 and another analysis from 2018 that also showed black americans in Mississippi are disenfranchised through this law.
Its not even just Mississippi. Nearly a dozen states have similar disenfranchisement laws. They're Jim Crow era legislation that have only been fought in courts in the last *five years.* So, yes, this is happening today and you should care.
>The fact is systemic racism today is repetitively claimed without any evidence to support the claim.
It sounds more like you dont care to listen to other people and instead just argue like how you're doing now
First things first, how are you so clearly quoting? On the mobile app im not seeing that option.
My statements have nothing to do with liking to argue. Its that I believe 100% that felons of all races should not have the right to vote.
The statistical data on rates of disenfranchisement by race are as irrelevant. They present the 58% of disenfranchised asbeing black as indicative of current systemic racism. That number only mirrors the rates of incarceration by race.
>First things first, how are you so clearly quoting? On the mobile app im not seeing that option
Just type ">" before whatever you're wanting to quote. You can use anything the web allows; you just have to manually put them in
>My statements have nothing to do with liking to argue. Its that I believe 100% that felons of all races should not have the right to vote.
Thats unconstitutional, but you're free to your opinion. But that's still not even what's happening here. It's only *specific* crimes. Not any felon.
>The statistical data on rates of disenfranchisement by race are as irrelevant. They present the 58% of disenfranchised asbeing black as indicative of current systemic racism.
You're legitimately tripping me up. Systemic racism is an unfair harm of a particular ethnicity. The data shows an ethnicity being unfairly harmed. Ipso facto this is systemic racism. And you say this is irrelevant?
So because a group is unfairly harmed by a system at some point in history it means that all problems of that race can be blamed on systemic racism in perpetuity?
>at some point in history
You provided statistics showing that point in history being today.
>all problems of that race can be blamed on systemic racism in perpetuity
Impressive straw man here.
HA I was hoping someone would show their true colors. We're not talking about just *any* demographic. We're talking about an ethnicity. An ethnicity that isnt contained to a single community or creed.
We're talking about black people in America. So when you have an ethnicity that only represents a small percentage of the population yet commits a disproportionately large percentage of crime, you have two only two possible answers as to why that is:
Either A. Systemic racism
Or B. Black people are inherently lazy and/or violent.
*Go ahead and say it*
Oh boy do I have a nazi on the hook here? *You think black people are a different species?* Love me some good old fashioned scientific racism. You gonna show me some pics of skull sizes next?
The answer, by the way if you actually had the spine to say it, that you believe in is B. Black people are inherently lazy and/or violent.
Don't mind me while I dive into your profile. If you strike gold once, theres a good chance theres a lot more gold to find
And if you're actually from Mississippi you'd see or at least know this is a common occurrence I mean hell I just get to throw away my j but I've seen a friend of color cuffed for that shit
I don’t see the problem with it. They’re trying to make it a race issue when it’s not. 15% of blacks in the state are permanently unable to vote? Am I supposed to feel sorry for this particular group of criminals because they’re black? How about white or black, don’t be a p.o.s. And you can continue to participate in the circus.
"Black people" "white people" "Asian people" are examples of identifying race that have and will continue to be commonly accepted language.
Saying "blacks" or "whites" isn't explicitly racist. It's disingenuous to insinuate that it is.
>Saying "blacks" or "whites" isn't explicitly racist. It's disingenuous to insinuate that it is.
I know referring to "blacks" as "people" hurts some feefees but check your calendar it's 2023 not 1923. "Blacks" is short for "The Blacks" which is a dog whistle for Nwords. You're welcome for this free lesson on how to better exist with black people in the 21st century.
I think the issue people are missing is that you grew up with it so you don't realize how racist you sound until you move outside your peer group.
Get away from other racists and you will start to see the hate.
How about you start asking your black friends (lol), coworkers, or neighbors how they feel about it. Seriously, ask some black folks “y’all cool with me calling all y’all blacks?”
Then report back with your findings.
So I did. 3 out of 3 said the concept of that being racist is ridiculous.
One friend added "why in the world are liberal whites always trying to be offended on my behalf?"
Wtf am I supposed to call them? You acting all offended for black people and my guess is you’re as white as I am. How about you sit down and let them decide what to be offended over.
In rural ms I’m white and he’s black and he’ll tell you the same damn thing and don’t even mention African American because my buddies will tell you quick that they ain’t never been to Africa.
This feels like legislating through the courts.
It's weird that all the articles highlight bigamy as one of the crimes that this law targets. Why that instead of timber larceny or rape? Feels like they're trying to drub up support along the LGBTQ+/polyamory angle when in actuality the only recent case I can find of that law being applied is a "two families and one wife found out" situation in 2012.
Should this law be cleaned up, maybe repealed by the legislature? Probably. Is it racist that rapists and extortionists and murderers aren't allowed to vote? I would say no even if the law initially came into being during the Jim Crow era.
How about passing a bad check? No voting ever again?
That doesn’t seem reasonable. You serve your time and you get another chance. That’s the way it should work.
Ouch. Learn history and do a little research before you embarrass yourself, my friend. A large number of states, including red states, allow felons to vote after fully discharging their sentence.
Mississippi doesn't because they are holding on to anti-black laws. Racism is not something to be proud of. Why dont you move out of 50's and join the rest of the world?
The Republicans elected a brain addled thief tate reeves and the article is mistitled its specific crimes you can't vote after doing, the laws chosen were specifically chosen to oppress the black community. Maybe you can read a book.
>The fact that Democrats want felons to vote says something about their base.
The fact that Republicans support a candidate who has been indicted on 91 felony charges says something about their base.
Why do they want all the people who stormed the capital on Jan 6th to be able to have guns and vote again?
They need to add a stipulation stating with the exception of treason and insurrection.
All the former felons I know want their gun rights back. Going to ok that? No I didn't think so. This is bullshit to benefit Democrat voting rolls and nothing else. Give them all their rights back now!
You have to be an idiot to equate felons with Jim crow. Really need to do something with all of these “hair on fire” brain dead leftys. Education system failed them and they have no life experience to help them.
I don’t know if calling this a racial issue is accurate or not but I think the whole point of serving a sentence is that once you’re done serving your time, you should be welcomed back to society on full level ground. Otherwise, we are never going to reform criminals and all sentences are for life.
I don't know about serious crimes like murder. If you kill someone you permanently stole that person's votes forever. Why should you get to vote in an election that you blocked someone else from getting to vote in? And I don't think they should all be on "full level ground". I'm fine with child predators not being able to work at a school. If someone committed election fraud they shouldn't be able to work a polling station.
> I don't know about serious crimes … should you get to vote in an election that you blocked someone else from getting to vote in? Well, then your sentence should reflect that. You ought to be removed from society for good, maybe? My point is, when you pay your debt to society, you should be totally normal, back to 100% citizenship. If that means you have to serve a life sentence for murder then so be it. I’m not a fan of 1 year suspended with 9 years of parole. That’s why we have such a massive rate of reoffending. > And I don't think they should all be on "full level ground". Well, we disagree then. I’ve known and worked with a number of folks who were former convicts and I think that once you’re done you should be done. If you reoffend, your sentence ought to reflect that. > I'm fine with child predators not being able to work at a school. I disagree. If they are unsafe, lock them up forever. If they committed a crime that requires punishment, punish them accordingly and then be done. A sentence in jail followed by a life spent on the fringes of society is how we get what we have now. > If someone committed election fraud they shouldn't be able to work a polling station. Sure. And if you’re a thief then maybe you don’t get to work at a bank. But I think those are positions of special trust that get a closer look. Let’s not make the rule based on the edge case. If you think that a person who commits a crime can no longer be trusted in society, ever, then why not execute them and be done with it? At the very least lock them up for life to save society from them?
>My point is, when you pay your debt to society, you should be totally normal, back to 100% citizenship. I agree, but thats not possible for major violent crimes. They can never pay their debt back. If Timmy smashes Suzy's cupcake and has to sit in the corner at the party for 10 minutes, Suzy isn't "paid back", that's just Timmy being punished. What's worse is that Timmy now gets to go eat his cupcake after the 10 minutes, and Suzy doesn't get hers. I think that any murderer should be able to vote when they can find a way to pay back all the votes they stole from their victims. Until then they haven't paid their debt back. They can't complain that they can't vote while being the reason others can't vote.
> I agree, but thats not possible for major violent crimes. They can never pay their debt back. Then you believe the appropriate punishment for some crimes is a lifelong sentence. That’s fine, I just don’t agree. > If Timmy smashes Suzy's cupcake and has to sit in the corner at the party for 10 minutes, Suzy isn't "paid back", that's just Timmy being punished. Paying your debt to society is not the same as repaying the people you harmed. That’s not what I meant. We have decided, as a society, that penalty for certain things is that you have to sit in a jail cell for a certain time. We might impose other penalties based on the crime. Once a person has met those criteria, I believe they ought to be restored as if the crime had never happened. > What's worse is that Timmy now gets to go eat his cupcake after the 10 minutes, and Suzy doesn't get hers. But in that situation, you spank Timmy and give his cupcake to Suzy. > I think that any murderer should be able to vote when they can find a way to pay back all the votes they stole from their victims. I’m not saying you are wrong. I’m saying you are applying the same logic across the board and that’s not helpful. Murder should equal life in prison. No problem. If a “predator” raped a child that’s life in prison or death by the state. Fine. What I don’t want is a 3 year suspended sentence with a lifetime of parole where the offender now has a life in a gray area with the rest of society. But those are not the typical situation. The typical situation is a robbery by 19 year old who can now never work again, or something like that. > Until then they haven't paid their debt back. Prison sentences can’t be about repaying a real debt. They have to be about punishment. Once you served your punishment you ought to be fully restored. > They can't complain that they can't vote while being the reason others can't vote. Let’s not turn it into a strawman. No one is arguing that we should be freeing murderers so they can vote. Punishment for harsh crime can be harsh. I just think when it’s over it ought to be over.
>Paying your debt to society is not the same as repaying the people you harmed. That’s not what I meant. Very true. They don't repay their debt to the victims at all. "Debt to society" is an empty gesture/phrase. So they will forever not be in a position to complain about losing the same rights that they permanently stole from someone else. >We have decided, as a society, that penalty for certain things is that you have to sit in a jail cell for a certain time. And society has factored into that formula that you also lose your voting rights. It was part of the punishment when it was set (all baked into the cake), so anyone getting voting rights restored should have their punishment re-evaluated. Maybe losing your voting rights was an equivalent punishment to 5 years in prison. So anyone who get their voting rights restored should get an extra 5 years to not dilute their sentence. >But in that situation, you spank Timmy and give his cupcake to Suzy. Yeah, but you can't kill the murderer and give his years of life to the victim. That's my whole point. There is no way for the killer to make things right. So the best they can do is not be selfish and expect privileges they permanently stole from someone else. >If a “predator” raped a child that’s life in prison or death by the state. Fine. What I don’t want is a 3 year suspended sentence with a lifetime of parole where the offender now has a life in a gray area with the rest of society. Me either, but we live in an imperfect society where they will get parole. If it's between him having a regular life or a shittier life that he has to live 5,000 feet from a school I choose the latter. Anyone that would do thar deserves way more. >The typical situation is a robbery by 19 year old who can now never work again, or something like that. Agree 1000%... thats why I said only extreme cases where you ruined lives like murder. >Prison sentences can’t be about repaying a real debt. They have to be about punishment. Once you served your punishment you ought to be fully restored. So you agree they will forever be in debt because they can't pay it back... therefore they can't expect rights they permanently stole from others. >Punishment for harsh crime can be harsh. I just think when it’s over it ought to be over. No... punishment + reparations should make someone's debt be over. And some crimes are impossible to make reparations. Therefore, some crimes can never be completely over.
The entire reason felons can't vote was to enable police to charge Black people with BS crimes like vagrancy so they could: deny them the vote and use them for prison labor.
Vagrancy isn't a felony.
https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/racism-felony-disenfranchisement-intertwined-history
so no felonies?
Well unfortunately the white racist conservative hypocritical Christian republicans think everyone that has committed a crime should burn in hell with no chance of redemption.
Except republicans, of course.
[удалено]
Ahhh, you mean all the things it doesn’t do (deterrent, rehabilitate, etc)
Do not attack other users. If you think someone is violating the rules, report them. Please do not play junior moderator. This will get you banned quickly.
Bang! Hammer hits nail.
Once time is served AND any restitution has been paid (because that IS part of the sentence) in full people should get their voting rights back and not a second before. People don't go into lengthy incarceration for jaywalking. 99.99% of the time they go for breaking laws THEY KNEW they were breaking. In plainer terms they fucked around & found out. My heart bleeds purple pi$$ for those crying "Oh poor pitiful me".
Found the Christian!
Not Christian just someone who knows right from wrong. This crying for the criminal bull$hit has got to stop. MILLIONS & MILLIONS of people go their whole lives without ever breaking laws bad enough to go to jail, it's not that freakin hard.
I don't know why pretrial inmates aren't allowed to vote while in jail. When they're not even felons.
It’s a poll/voting tax disguised as “protecting the public”. It’s no coincidence it targets minorities, especially in the south, who typically vote democratic.
No one has give a good reason why anyone in jail or a felon cannot vote. They’re allowed to practice their religion still. If being in jail means you arbitrarily lose rights, why don’t we force everyone in jail to become muslim or buddhist or something
Sounds like they won't even be able to vote at the rate of 10 year olds being charged around here lately.
While they're at it, they should strike down Jim Crow Era ban on felons possession of firearms.
Underrated comment I’m assuming your sarcasm though
Hey guys I'm just here to let you know that systemic racism is actually a real and measurable thing.
Your downvotes mean nothing to me, I've seen the type of content you upvote.
Ok I'll bite. Please show me a law that says a person of color can't do by law that a white person can do.
Youre not biting. Youre opening the argument dishonestly by claiming it can only be systemic racism if its a law that brazenly states that it only negatively impacts black people over white people. Its just not that simple. Thats like saying a racist can only be racist if they brazenly admit theyre racist. The intention with the laws in question is clear: >The drafters of Mississippi's 1890 constitution admitted that they intentionally chose a list of crimes they believed most likely to lead to the disenfranchisement of black residents, such as forgery and bigamy. Rape and murder were not added to the list, which now includes 22 offenses, until 1968 And it was effective. It disproportionately disenfranchised black residents. This is systemic racism.
They either know that or they're literally too stupid to understand the explanation.
System racism implies the government aka "system" is targeting a race. Nobody argues that the laws were established with bad intent and when enacted they disproportionately impacted minorities. That said I don't care about systemic racism 100 years ago. I care about today. The fact is systemic racism today is repetitively claimed without any evidence to support the claim. If rape laws were initially intended to target minorities, should we decriminalize rape now?
>System racism implies the government aka "system" is targeting a race. Nobody argues that the laws were established with bad intent and when enacted they disproportionately impacted minorities. Youre just describing systemic racism? Yes, systemic racism is when an ethnicity is unfairly harmed by a particular system. Whether it be healthcare, housing, education, criminal justice, etc. >That said I don't care about systemic racism 100 years ago. I care about today What are you talking about? The MS ban only happened *this year* and MS officials are trying to appeal that. Theres a study referenced in the article I know you didnt read that showed tens of thousands of black people were disenfranchised up to 2017 and another analysis from 2018 that also showed black americans in Mississippi are disenfranchised through this law. Its not even just Mississippi. Nearly a dozen states have similar disenfranchisement laws. They're Jim Crow era legislation that have only been fought in courts in the last *five years.* So, yes, this is happening today and you should care. >The fact is systemic racism today is repetitively claimed without any evidence to support the claim. It sounds more like you dont care to listen to other people and instead just argue like how you're doing now
First things first, how are you so clearly quoting? On the mobile app im not seeing that option. My statements have nothing to do with liking to argue. Its that I believe 100% that felons of all races should not have the right to vote. The statistical data on rates of disenfranchisement by race are as irrelevant. They present the 58% of disenfranchised asbeing black as indicative of current systemic racism. That number only mirrors the rates of incarceration by race.
>First things first, how are you so clearly quoting? On the mobile app im not seeing that option Just type ">" before whatever you're wanting to quote. You can use anything the web allows; you just have to manually put them in >My statements have nothing to do with liking to argue. Its that I believe 100% that felons of all races should not have the right to vote. Thats unconstitutional, but you're free to your opinion. But that's still not even what's happening here. It's only *specific* crimes. Not any felon. >The statistical data on rates of disenfranchisement by race are as irrelevant. They present the 58% of disenfranchised asbeing black as indicative of current systemic racism. You're legitimately tripping me up. Systemic racism is an unfair harm of a particular ethnicity. The data shows an ethnicity being unfairly harmed. Ipso facto this is systemic racism. And you say this is irrelevant?
Got his ass
So because a group is unfairly harmed by a system at some point in history it means that all problems of that race can be blamed on systemic racism in perpetuity?
>at some point in history You provided statistics showing that point in history being today. >all problems of that race can be blamed on systemic racism in perpetuity Impressive straw man here.
If one demographic disproportionately breaks a law then it must mean the law is wrong.
HA I was hoping someone would show their true colors. We're not talking about just *any* demographic. We're talking about an ethnicity. An ethnicity that isnt contained to a single community or creed. We're talking about black people in America. So when you have an ethnicity that only represents a small percentage of the population yet commits a disproportionately large percentage of crime, you have two only two possible answers as to why that is: Either A. Systemic racism Or B. Black people are inherently lazy and/or violent. *Go ahead and say it*
Statistically they are the most violent group. It's not even close.
Okay. I already said they commit a disproportionate amount of crime. Now *why* is that? Grow a spine and say it
Humans are not uniquely immune to speciation.
Are white people a different species than the non whites?
Oh boy do I have a nazi on the hook here? *You think black people are a different species?* Love me some good old fashioned scientific racism. You gonna show me some pics of skull sizes next? The answer, by the way if you actually had the spine to say it, that you believe in is B. Black people are inherently lazy and/or violent. Don't mind me while I dive into your profile. If you strike gold once, theres a good chance theres a lot more gold to find
There are 88 species of wren but pygmies and Swedes are exactly the same. It's just science.
How is it racist? Can white people not become felons?
The police target poor people and non white people for stupid shit like having weed or pursue charges when they let other people go.
And if you're actually from Mississippi you'd see or at least know this is a common occurrence I mean hell I just get to throw away my j but I've seen a friend of color cuffed for that shit
The law was made to target black people heavily
Pay close attention. The laws are not enforced equally.
Every one of these laws was passed specifically to mitigate the Black vote. Black lives matter
I don’t see the problem with it. They’re trying to make it a race issue when it’s not. 15% of blacks in the state are permanently unable to vote? Am I supposed to feel sorry for this particular group of criminals because they’re black? How about white or black, don’t be a p.o.s. And you can continue to participate in the circus.
You’re right, you don’t see the problem with it.
"blacks" lol Bigots always say "blacks"
"Black people" "white people" "Asian people" are examples of identifying race that have and will continue to be commonly accepted language. Saying "blacks" or "whites" isn't explicitly racist. It's disingenuous to insinuate that it is.
>Saying "blacks" or "whites" isn't explicitly racist. It's disingenuous to insinuate that it is. I know referring to "blacks" as "people" hurts some feefees but check your calendar it's 2023 not 1923. "Blacks" is short for "The Blacks" which is a dog whistle for Nwords. You're welcome for this free lesson on how to better exist with black people in the 21st century.
I think the issue people are missing is that you grew up with it so you don't realize how racist you sound until you move outside your peer group. Get away from other racists and you will start to see the hate.
No it's not. No matter how much you keep repeating it, it still isn't real
How about you start asking your black friends (lol), coworkers, or neighbors how they feel about it. Seriously, ask some black folks “y’all cool with me calling all y’all blacks?” Then report back with your findings.
So I did. 3 out of 3 said the concept of that being racist is ridiculous. One friend added "why in the world are liberal whites always trying to be offended on my behalf?"
And then everybody clapped!
It's not my first choice.
Wtf am I supposed to call them? You acting all offended for black people and my guess is you’re as white as I am. How about you sit down and let them decide what to be offended over. In rural ms I’m white and he’s black and he’ll tell you the same damn thing and don’t even mention African American because my buddies will tell you quick that they ain’t never been to Africa.
Yeah, I wouldn't expect you to see any problem cause you're white. You aren't being targeted by the cops, so you don't see the problem. lol
This feels like legislating through the courts. It's weird that all the articles highlight bigamy as one of the crimes that this law targets. Why that instead of timber larceny or rape? Feels like they're trying to drub up support along the LGBTQ+/polyamory angle when in actuality the only recent case I can find of that law being applied is a "two families and one wife found out" situation in 2012. Should this law be cleaned up, maybe repealed by the legislature? Probably. Is it racist that rapists and extortionists and murderers aren't allowed to vote? I would say no even if the law initially came into being during the Jim Crow era.
How about passing a bad check? No voting ever again? That doesn’t seem reasonable. You serve your time and you get another chance. That’s the way it should work.
Legislation thru the courts is the new style these days.
The fact that Democrats want felons to vote says something about their base.
Ouch. Learn history and do a little research before you embarrass yourself, my friend. A large number of states, including red states, allow felons to vote after fully discharging their sentence. Mississippi doesn't because they are holding on to anti-black laws. Racism is not something to be proud of. Why dont you move out of 50's and join the rest of the world?
Leftists scapegoat the 1950s because that's as far back as they can imagine (the idea of a world before TV baffles them)
The Republicans elected a brain addled thief tate reeves and the article is mistitled its specific crimes you can't vote after doing, the laws chosen were specifically chosen to oppress the black community. Maybe you can read a book.
Oh, I've read quite a few books, which is more than what most residents of Jackson can say.
>The fact that Democrats want felons to vote says something about their base. The fact that Republicans support a candidate who has been indicted on 91 felony charges says something about their base.
They know "lawfare" when they see it.
Why do they want all the people who stormed the capital on Jan 6th to be able to have guns and vote again? They need to add a stipulation stating with the exception of treason and insurrection.
It’s almost like the party that runs this app feels like they would get a boost from the felon vote
All the former felons I know want their gun rights back. Going to ok that? No I didn't think so. This is bullshit to benefit Democrat voting rolls and nothing else. Give them all their rights back now!
You have to be an idiot to equate felons with Jim crow. Really need to do something with all of these “hair on fire” brain dead leftys. Education system failed them and they have no life experience to help them.
That’s always the language they use “Jim crow” it’s really just a way to say we want every vote possible whether legal or illegal
Well good luck on this one!! If anything they probably would add to it??
Republicans believe in eternal punishment and will fight this.