A prisoner voting ban shows again how few checks there are on Parliamentary power

[zqwerty]

A prisoner voting ban shows again how few checks there are on Parliamentary power

https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/560...tary-power

Is this because Prisoners would almost always vote Labour, anything but National?

[heisenberg]

A prisoner voting ban shows again how few checks there are on Parliamentary power

https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/560...tary-power

Is this because Prisoners would almost always vote Labour, anything but National?

they are in prison for a reason, of course they will be labour voters, scum

[Oh_hunnihunni]

Oh you are just cruisin' for a bruisin' you are, lol.

I very much doubt all prisoners are left voters. In fact, I suspect a good number would be seriously right wing. As in maga right wing...

Especially in those tightly controlled 'special units'.

[zqwerty]

"they are in prison for a reason, of course they will be labour voters, scum"

But they aren't getting to vote because the National Party is running the show.

heisenberg do try to comprehend what is being communicated before spouting nonsense by misunderstanding the point of the article and my comment completely, the prisoners won't be voting because the National Government will not allow it.

Even if you are a criminal you are still an NZ citizen, you don't lose you rights, is the whole point.

So you didn't read the rest of the article about NZ only paying lip service to the International Declaration of Human Rights

It seems that NZ is basically run by vested interests and the Government does anything but that because it is composed of vested interests ie the rich.

As we know money is the main goal and anything else like fairly sharing the riches of the country a distant follower. The Government just leaves it up to the market place to decide how things go sort of like the mythical trickle down theory balancing things out for the poorer part of the community.

[heisenberg]

"they are in prison for a reason, of course they will be labour voters, scum"

But they aren't getting to vote because the National Party is running the show.

heisenberg do try to comprehend what is being communicated before spouting nonsense by misunderstanding the point of the article and my comment completely, the prisoners won't be voting because the National Government will not allow it.

Even if you are a criminal you are still an NZ citizen, you don't lose you rights, is the whole point.

So you didn't read the rest of the article about NZ only paying lip service to the International Declaration of Human Rights

It seems that NZ is basically run by vested interests and the Government does anything but that because it is composed of vested interests ie the rich.

As we know money is the main goal and anything else like fairly sharing the riches of the country a distant follower.  The Government just leaves it up to the market place to decide how things go sort of like the mythical trickle down theory balancing things out for the poorer part of the community.

read the little red book did you

[Oh_hunnihunni]

This one? I have my copy, over fifty years old...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Litt...Schoolbook

[zqwerty]

Interesting, I don't know that Little Red Book at all, the one I thought we were talking about is the Little Red Book by Chairman Mao Tse-tung which I haven't read but was passed around my school in the middle of Africa in the old days lol.

[dken31]

Regardless of your views on prisoner voting, I don't get the "it is a breach of their human rights" argument. Confining them to prison is also a breach of their "human rights" and the general idea of prison is that committing certain crimes provides valid justification for either a temporary or permanent (in the case of a life sentence) removal of certain rights. Whether or not removal of the specific right to vote is justified, is a valid debate; however, that it is a human right in the first place doesn't provide any valid support for the "removal is unjustified" side of the argument (unless you're actually arguing that prisons should be abolished in their entirety).

[zqwerty]

You are not seeing that without the ability to redeem ones self there is no reason to try to get better, that is one of the strengths of Christianity.

Going to prison is an immediate punishment for committing a crime but not taking away all rights, if that is done ie removing voting rights is another signal to the prisoner that they have become or starting to become irredeemable, you are not trying to squelch prisoners into the ground you are trying to succinctly punish and then encourage redemption and eventual integration back into society, surely this is elementary thinking and obvious to any thinking person?

New Zealand is a signatory to The Declaration of Human Rights which is a Universal Document and should be abiding by it. It is a document which envelopes all civilized countries who have signed it and NZ is one of them. Taking away ones voting right is in itself a crime for any reason. Trump is walking the thin edge of this right now.

Criminals are people just like you and me who have fallen by the wayside and need to be encouraged to get with the team again, not hated forever, there is no path to redemption if that is the case.

Read Universal Declaration of Human Rights

https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal...man-rights

[king1]

I'm on the fence on this one...

On the one hand - prisoners have given the big Fuck You to society to be there in the first place so why should they be entitled to vote on critical societal issues... until they have done their time.

On the other hand - voting is an important part of membership in society and everyone should have their say. All opinions should be welcomed otherwise you are excluding a certain segment of society, which could become a rocky road, and it is then not a true reflection of society...

[dken31]

You are not seeing that without the ability to redeem ones self there is no reason to try to get better, that is one of the strengths of Christianity.

Going to prison is an immediate punishment for committing a crime but not taking away all rights, if that is done ie removing voting rights is another signal to the prisoner that they have become or starting to become irredeemable, you are not trying to squelch prisoners into the ground you are trying to succinctly punish and then encourage redemption and eventual integration back into society, surely this is elementary thinking and obvious to any thinking person?

New Zealand is a signatory to The Declaration of Human Rights which is a Universal Document and should be abiding by it.  It is a document which envelopes all civilized countries who have signed it and NZ is one of them.  Taking away ones voting right is in itself a crime for any reason.  Trump is walking the thin edge of this right now.

Criminals are people just like you and me who have fallen by the wayside and need to be encouraged to get with the team again, not hated forever, there is no path to redemption if that is the case.

Read Universal Declaration of Human Rights

https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal...man-rights

I had a quick read of the Declaration, and imprisonment breaches at least 7 or 7 of the 30 articles, which makes it clear that "it is a basic human right" isn't a logical defense of the position that it is wrong to deny prisoners the vote.  You're still free to argue (as protected by the Declaration  ) that it is a specific right that shouldn't be removed, despite so many others being removed, but that "it is a basic human right" isn't a valid argument.

Having said that, you did actually provide an additional argument for it not being removed, being your argument for the need for the hope of redemption.  And, I agree with you regarding that need.  A person with no hope for the future is someone with nothing to lose, and that is a dangerous person to have in society.  However, I disagree with you that not being allowed to vote while in jail removes any hope of redemption.  To the contrary, I think it actually provides motivation: do your time, reintegrate into society and you regain that right.  If voting rights were removed for life, I'd agree with you, however if they're only removed while actually in prison, then I don't see the problem.

[zqwerty]

It's very simple if you banish people from society effectively by taking away the right to vote you just create more problems.

Nobody is saying that being imprisoned for committing crimes is breaching human rights I don't know where you are getting that from, since being children we learn that doing wrong will result in punishment and as an adult deprivation of liberty by a lawful method is a valid punishment not an offense against human rights.

[harm_less]

It's very simple if you banish people from society effectively by taking away the right to vote you just create more problems.

But isn't "banishing people from society" the point of imprisonment?

[dken31]

It's very simple if you banish people from society effectively by taking away the right to vote you just create more problems.

Nobody is saying that being imprisoned for committing crimes is breaching human rights I don't know where you are getting that from, since being children we learn that doing wrong will result in punishment and as an adult deprivation of liberty by a lawful method is a valid punishment not an offense against human rights.

I am saying that imprisonment is breaching human rights.  It indisputably breaches more than five of the 30 articles in the Declaration of Human Rights (freedom of movement, freedom of association, etc.).

We are (mostly) all OK with those breaches because they're a justified consequence to the actions of the criminal, and you're obviously OK with most of those breaches too, given that you don't even see them as a breach.  My point is that, if we're OK with those rights being breached, you can no longer argue against the removal of voting rights simply from a "its a breach of human rights" viewpoint.

And yes, I agree with harm_less that imprisonment is absolutely a temporary banishment from society.  They are still people, they are still afforded some level of dignity and care, however they're very much banished and a lot about prison is extremely undignified (e.g. adults being given a bedtime, no choice as to what they wear or eat etc.).  To continue to single out the right to vote seems to be a case of not seeing the forest for the trees.

[zqwerty]

If you commit a crime in another country you don't loose the right to vote in NZ that is fundamental to your citizenship, it should be the same if you do that in NZ.

BANISH | English meaning - Cambridge Dictionary
Cambridge Dictionary
https://dictionary.cambridge.org › dictionary › banish
to send someone away, especially from their country, and not allow them to come back. He was banished to an uninhabited island for a year

Banish is definitely not the same as imprison. Losing your right to vote is a big thing, but of course it really isn't with the state of the parties these days voting is a joke really, just a symbolic gesture that you do have the power to change the direction your country is taking.

[Oh_hunnihunni]

I agree dken. And it isn't as if we don't have clear research, and working examples of how to do it better. Heavens, we even imprison children...

[zqwerty]

This guy is the worst of the worst, no favours for him.

Beyond redemption or anything else, the Law has already made judgemental mistakes of a high order with him.

This murder has plenty of details not released whereas just after the crimes were committed much more detail was available to the public. I think one of the most horrific murders ever anywhere. Some people should be imprisoned forever.

I know that little church area very well, I used to take my dog Stella there for walks quite often. It was an idyllic place so lovely, now I can't go there any more without recalling what happened, luckily I don't anymore because Stella is dead.

https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/5592...-brutality

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c...%2C_NZ.jpg

What am I saying? Some people cannot be redeemed no matter what you or anyone does.

[Lilith7]

I agree dken. And it isn't as if we don't have clear research, and working examples of how to do it better. Heavens, we even imprison children...

Recently, Queensland decided to imprison ten year olds...

If we go back into history a bit, we can see that children were at one time,also hung in Britian.

https://www.capitalpunishmentuk.org/child.html


It doesn't work. harsh punishment has almost never worked.

Of course,if we were serious about addressing crime then we'd look at & try to address,the causes. But that's too hard, takes too long & might cost too much. Far easier to wave a big stick & bash a few people & look tough...

[Oh_hunnihunni]

I think imprisoning someone for long periods of time is callous, cruel, and inhumane.

I think they should be offered an alternative, a quiet well managed gentle death, with full body donation to the medical profession to reallocate to those most in need of transplants.

Now, THAT would be paying back their debt to society...

[heisenberg]

I agree dken. And it isn't as if we don't have clear research, and working examples of how to do it better. Heavens, we even imprison children...

If we go back into history a bit, we can see that children were at one time,also hung in Britian.

we still beat children to death in NZ, no need to go back in history

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/61-little-...U4YEIL5I4/