Totally agree with you Moe..
That is why I am saying the law needs to be revised and clarifications made.

that's different, that is a tool used to take lives , one on one offense

a vote has not fatal one on one potential

if they are contributing to the production and profits of others, they should have a vote of who is representing them

I respectfully disagree on the basis that some crimes maybe forgivable to some and honestly I believe after working with offenders for so many years that some Felony's shouldn't receive a full pardon ever...

Again I am most respectful of your Opinion mine is just a bit different.

we actually agree

that is a matter of sentencing reforms possibly

but if the sentence is completed,, it should be done,,,

and if the person is expected to go back and be productive in society they should have a vote while the do it,,,


imho

I like the thinking being put in to this subject area by so many posters.

I decide most things by as dry a logical process as I can manage, despite being a very emotional person.

As mightymoe points out, there are lots of different kinds of felons in the world. I've too often watched in the news, as some recent incident gets a lot of people riled up enough that they decide to avenge themselves, by declaring that some previously relatively innocuous crime, is now a felony, all because they were REEEEEEEEEELY mad at some one guy who did that, and hurt a child badly in the process or something. Or they just hate people who look like him, and so want the punishment jacked up, so that the NEXT time he does it, they can box him up permanently.

Add in sloppy lawmakers, writing the new law too vaguely, and people who did nothing much at all, end up having their lives destroyed.

Considering majority of felons committed their crimes while damn well knowing if convicted they would lose voting rights. Too fricking bad! No vote for you.

its a big assumption that people who are caught{many more people are breaking laws than are ever caught} have any idea about voting rights

especially since those laws were put in place in civil war times,,,


its also a weird assumption that people involved in serious crimes are the voting type,,,lol

Back on topic....votes, which is actually what this OP is about.....VA is a key battleground state in the general election....and the Dems need ALL those 200,000 votes they can get...felons voting or not....

1,024,000 Repub votes in the primary

783,000 Dem votes

http://www.nytimes.com/elections/results/virginia

How they fall in the general, who knows....

VA Gov. Terry McAuliffe under investigation for campaign contributions.

Evan Perez, Shimon Prokupecz and Pamela Brown,

CNN
Story highlights

Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe is the subject of a federal investigation contributions
MacAuliffe has not been contacted by authorities, but a spokesman said he will fully cooperate if he is

Washington (CNN)Virginia Democratic Gov. Terry McAuliffe is the subject of an ongoing investigation by the FBI and prosecutors from the Justice Department's public integrity unit, U.S. officials briefed on the probe say.

The investigation dates to at least last year and has focused, at least in part, on whether donations to his gubernatorial campaign violated the law, the officials said.

McAuliffe wasn't notified by investigators that he is a target of the probe, according to the officials.

"The Governor will certainly cooperate with the government if he is contacted about it," said Marc Elias, attorney for McAuliffe campaign, in a statement to CNN.

As part of the probe, the officials said, investigators have scrutinized McAuliffe's time as a board member of the Clinton Global Initiative, a vehicle of the charitable foundation set up by former President Bill Clinton.

There's no allegation that the foundation did anything improper; the probe has focused on McAuliffe and the electoral campaign donations, the officials said.

Spokespeople for the Justice Department and the FBI declined to comment.

Among the McAuliffe donations that drew the interest of the investigators was $120,000 from a Chinese businessman, Wang Wenliang, through his U.S. businesses. Wang was previously delegate to China's National People's Congress, the country's ceremonial legislature.

"Neither the Governor nor his former campaign has knowledge of this matter, but as reported, contributions to the campaign from Mr. Wang were completely lawful," said Elias.

Wang also has been a donor to the Clinton foundation, pledging $2 million. He also has been a prolific donor to other causes, including to New York University, Harvard and environmental issues in Florida.

U.S. election law prohibits foreign nationals from donating to federal, state or local elections. Penalties for violations include fines and/or imprisonment.

But Wang holds U.S. permanent resident status, according to a spokeswoman, which would make him a U.S. person under election law and eligible to donate to McAuliffe's campaign.

Neither Wang nor his company used to make the donations have been contacted by U.S. investigators, according to the spokeswoman.

McAuliffe is the second consecutive Virginia governor to be investigated by Justice Department and the FBI. In 2014, Bob McDonnell was convicted of corruption charges related to $175,000 in loans and gifts he received from a donor and friend. The Supreme Court is weighing an appeal of the conviction.

It couldn't be learned what else the FBI and Justice Department are investigating as part of the probe in McAuliffe.

The officials say the investigation remains active and ongoing.


http://www.cnn.com/2016/05/23/politics/terry-mcauliffe-fbi-doj-federal-investigation-campaign-contributions/

every citizen should have the right to a vote,; except those who have broken the law, so as to be incarcerated,... they have surrendered the right to vote, IMHO

should consern about the dark site behide the mask of human rights no doubt to it many Africa-americans know more about then us. some time change the view on circle you'll find mores to consern as some people of realating to should sue kind of face both thing seen on signt........other wise the original corupting till totally cosume the tradtionalist both convictist their self.policy it self still run by people it self not thie paper or ink. and some time it is necessary combine with force or the fact it self will turn the other side as those junkies still exsiting. then some people should consern why between both of "lord" and pen. unless those cowboys will gona HooooWeee again. there will no confidencial rivals. and these words are not point to any kind of factions i dont against any kind of logical revolution but only limited within.....

I don't believe you can demand people contribute to society without a vote,,,

The incarcerated should lose the right to vote, heck, they shouldn't even know there's a election going on... Once they're in the big house, they should lose complete contact with the outside world. Once they're out, they should have just as many right as anyone, weapons excluded!

Things will be all different when I take over

I don't have a problem with convicted felons being able to vote.
I read that currently those incarcerated or on parole can't vote in national elections.....but some state laws prevent them from voting permanently.
Personally I think that there should be 3-5 year waiting period once they have been released and fulfilled the terms of their parole because of the recidivism rate.
Such a waiting period could be an incentive that might help reduce the recidivism rate....and however small that number would be, it would be a positive thing.

This "decision' by the Clinton cuck McAuliffe isn't about being a good guy and restoring rights to felons
He doesn't give two $hits about felon's rights....even when there's now a chance he may become one lol
Queen Clinton called and ordered him to make this executive decision....and reminded him " suicide" is contagious among Clinton hang arounds.

that's how the Law is set up here in Switzerland!