chem1st Posted November 2, 2010 Share Posted November 2, 2010 you are away that it is 2010 and quoting the laws from 1562 is not relevant as no-one has lived that long. Other than mistaken identity I can't think of reason now, why someone would be in jail even though they are a law abiding and moral person? Whilst I am encouraging the right of prisoners to vote, I must concur that you make a good argument for restricting the right to vote of the general population. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFKvsNixon Posted November 2, 2010 Share Posted November 2, 2010 you are away that it is 2010 and quoting the laws from 1562 is not relevant as no-one has lived that long. Other than mistaken identity I can't think of reason now, why someone would be in jail even though they are a law abiding and moral person? It's only just over 50 years that homosexuals was threatened with prison for having consensual sex. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
llamatron Posted November 2, 2010 Author Share Posted November 2, 2010 Whilst I am encouraging the right of prisoners to vote, I must concur that you make a good argument for restricting the right to vote of the general population. genious clap........clap.............clap you still have made no coherent point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alex3659 Posted November 2, 2010 Share Posted November 2, 2010 Other than mistaken identity I can't think of reason now, why someone would be in jail even though they are a law abiding and moral person? Then you are very blinkered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
llamatron Posted November 2, 2010 Author Share Posted November 2, 2010 what happens when a released murderer runs with the pledge to rid the constituency of prisons, and to spend taxes on providing paintballing for inmates etc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
llamatron Posted November 2, 2010 Author Share Posted November 2, 2010 Then you are very blinkered. go on........... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
llamatron Posted November 2, 2010 Author Share Posted November 2, 2010 the prisoners argument was "they have been unable to vote for things that benefit them":hihi: such as shorter sentences maybe hmmmmm Im sure the lawyers argument was better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
llamatron Posted November 2, 2010 Author Share Posted November 2, 2010 the expert on the bbcs argument is: "people like Ian huntley are unlikely to vote anyway" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFKvsNixon Posted November 2, 2010 Share Posted November 2, 2010 what happens when a released murderer runs with the pledge to rid the constituency of prisons, and to spend taxes on providing paintballing for inmates etc I'd guess is that they wouldn't get many votes, I can't see that going down well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conrod Posted November 2, 2010 Share Posted November 2, 2010 Oh that makes it ok then does it..Totally. You can't determine the way an entire country is run for the sake of a handful of individuals - minorities of all kinds have a hugely disproportionate voice in this country. We should concentrate a bit more on the needs of the majority and let the minority groups whine to their hearts' contents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.