Amazon.com Widgets

Should Ex-Convicts Be Allowed to Hold Public Office?

  • Ex-Cons/Felons in General

    These ex-convicts who have already been released from jail (hence the term "ex") would not have been released in the first place if the criminal court did not find them to be reformed. Following this train of thought, these people, once considered reformed should have all their legal rights back (including voting and running for office) regardless of whatever crime/felony they previously committed. Their criminal background should not be defining them once they're a changed individual and they should by all means be allowed to hold a position of political power to increase representation for ex-cons particularly due to the negative image that people associate with ex-cons. This would reduce stigma in society against ex-cons and these people can finally be free from social society constantly viewing them as threats. The state needs to send a clear message to its people that these people are reformed and are now like every other individual once again after serving time and going through rigorous psychological evaluations, reformative training, and so on. These people should hence no longer be considered a threat because if they were then why would they be released in the first place? As long as these people qualify to run for office, the state should not intervene and let potential candidates to run even if they're ex-cons. Ultimately, the decision is in the hands of the people, if the citizens want an ex-con as their mayor/governor/head of state/etc. Then so be it. This is how democracy works.

  • Ex-Cons/Felons in General

    These ex-convicts who have already been released from jail (hence the term "ex") would not have been released in the first place if the criminal court did not find them to be reformed. Following this train of thought, these people, once considered reformed should have all their legal rights back (including voting and running for office) regardless of whatever crime/felony they previously committed. Their criminal background should not be defining them once they're a changed individual and they should by all means be allowed to hold a position of political power to increase representation for ex-cons particularly due to the negative image that people associate with ex-cons. This would reduce stigma in society against ex-cons and these people can finally be free from social society constantly viewing them as threats. The state needs to send a clear message to its people that these people are reformed and are now like every other individual once again after serving time and going through rigorous psychological evaluations, reformative training, and so on. These people should hence no longer be considered a threat because if they were then why would they be released in the first place? As long as these people qualify to run for office, the state should not intervene and let potential candidates to run even if they're ex-cons. Ultimately, the decision is in the hands of the people, if the citizens want an ex-con as their mayor/governor/head of state/etc. Then so be it. This is how democracy works.

  • If they have not lost the right to vote, ex-cons can still hold office.

    Being an ex-con should not be a loss of all rights. Someone who made a mistake, and then paid their debt to society should be able to return to their previous status. A mistake is just that. Being an ex-convict and being a felon are two different distinctions. Felons lose their right to vote, among other things. If someone has had their right to vote removed, they should not be able to hold public office. However, being an ex-convict is not indicative of a felony offense.

  • Ex-cons are still citizens.

    Yes, public office should be open to citizens and if Ex-Convicts have served their time they should be given the chance to hold office. They may be able to do a good job, and would have to be elected anyway, and they may have became law abiding and good citizens after being released.

  • Ex-Felons Can't Even Vote

    Ex-convicts shouldn't be allowed to hold public office because felons and ex-felons can't even vote. Having an ex-convict in office would only ask for trouble from voters. No one would even vote for an ex-convict. If that happens, there is a sad state of affairs in America if enough people are duped into voting for someone who used to be in jail for a crime.

  • No, they should not.

    Of course there is such a thing as paying for one's crime after doing the time, but truly we have no idea who has really repented and turned their life around and who has not. If one has done something evil enought to be incarcerated, it is fine to bar this person from public office.

  • No, can't hold office

    I don't think a convict can hold Public office, especially while serving their
    time. An ex-convict might. I'd guess that he'll get replaced somehow if
    his appeal fails and he's actually convicted. I just can't fathom how
    he's even won the race. He/She can't hold office if he is convicted and should resigned right away.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.
>