Does the disenfranchisement of UK prisoners make them all Political prisoners?

[Bryn]

Discuss. I, by the way, can not see how it does not.

[verismissimo]

What about the disenfanchisement of Scots living outside Scotland, Bryn?

[Simon]

I, by the way, can not see how it does not.

I expect most of us would have assumed that anyway, had we thought about it.

People who won't play by the rules of society deserve to forfeit some of the privileges that belonging to that society bestows upon them. One may be liberty. Another may be the right to influence that society's direction and/or representation. Another may be the right to drive, or to keep animals.

Except in the sense that the rule of law and legislation is a function of "political" discussion, there is nothing political about it. They are not imprisoned because they hold a political view (which would be one sensible definition of a "political prisoner"). Rather, they are inmprisoned because they have chosen not to obey the rules that most other members of the society observe.

Or, to put the point another way, how can the removal of the right to vote cause the prisoner to be a "political" prisoner and the removal of liberty or of the right to keep animals not do the same?

[jayne lee wilson]

If it does nothing else, it places them outside the UK democracy; further away from the society most will have to return to. A basic denial of human rights layered indiscriminately upon a punishment, it can only do more harm than good.

[John Shelton]

They are not imprisoned because they hold a political view

Give it time. Give it time.

This was the surprising injunction from the Metropolitan Police issued to businesses and members of the public in Westminster last week. There was no warning about other political groups, but next to an image of the anarchist emblem, the City of Westminster police's "counter terrorist focus desk" called for anti-anarchist whistleblowers stating: "Anarchism is a political philosophy which considers the state undesirable, unnecessary, and harmful, and instead promotes a stateless society, or anarchy. Any information relating to anarchists should be reported to your local police."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/jul/31/westminster-police-anarchist-whistleblower-advice

[Lateralthinking1]

This issue is somewhat trumped up by international institutions. More than anything else, it over inflates the importance of an individual vote in practical terms. Any Conservative living his entire life in Hackney is effectively disenfranchised. Ditto any Labour supporter who spends 90 odd years in Henley. While all the hoo-ha goes on, it permits the system as it applies to ex-offenders to remain unchallenged. Ex-prisoners are severely discriminated against in terms of housing and employment. In fact, anyone who stole a loaf of bread when aged 18 may well be at a severe disadvantage re the CRB and in many other ways systemically.

That, I think, is the real disenfranchisement and in every respect it is criminal. It punishes offenders twice and permanently. It also punishes society which has to pay for each term of an individual's imprisonment following his failure to reintegrate. The entire system is geared towards making rehabilitation impossible. My view is that even murderers who have served their time should be able to work with all members of the community. The only exception to the rule would be notorious sex offenders. It is also about time that prisons effectively became 24 hour classrooms. Ditch the televisions and make them centres of excellence in schooling.

Incidentally, it is interesting how the system works or did once. I knew a very nice guy when I was in my employment. On one occasion I met up with him and his mate for an evening. The mate of his seemed very pleasant in a typical suit and tie way. He held some position of responsibility where we worked. Referring to him several days later, the guy said to me "you knew that he murdered his wife?" I really couldn't believe it and yet I did because the guy was always genuine. One of the few I could believe. Apparently it had happened, there were mitigating circumstances, he had done his time, and it had been decided that he should be re-employed. It wouldn't happen now anywhere and in most walks of life it would never have happened. That's probably a pity.

[teamsaint]

Give it time. Give it time.

This was the surprising injunction from the Metropolitan Police issued to businesses and members of the public in Westminster last week. There was no warning about other political groups, but next to an image of the anarchist emblem, the City of Westminster police's "counter terrorist focus desk" called for anti-anarchist whistleblowers stating: "Anarchism is a political philosophy which considers the state undesirable, unnecessary, and harmful, and instead promotes a stateless society, or anarchy. Any information relating to anarchists should be reported to your local police."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/ju...eblower-advice

Thanks for that link, HN. Perhaps I should read the papers.

Or perhaps not. Very worrying times.

[MrGongGong]

Thanks for that link, HN. Perhaps I should read the papers.

Or perhaps not. Very worrying times.

Don't be daft
Nothing to hide, nothing to fear

[Bryn]

Don't be daft
Nothing to hide, nothing to fear

Hmm, I am now left worrying about whether we here have a duty to report Simon to the police for his anarchic views on ignoring international laws to which the UK is signed up. Would we all be accessories were we not to do so?

[MrGongGong]

Hmm, I am now left worrying about whether we here have a duty to report Simon to the police for his anarchic views on ignoring international laws to which the UK is signed up. Would we all be accessories were we not to do so?

I think we do have a civic duty to shop him

[scottycelt]

Give it time. Give it time.

This was the surprising injunction from the Metropolitan Police issued to businesses and members of the public in Westminster last week. There was no warning about other political groups, but next to an image of the anarchist emblem, the City of Westminster police's "counter terrorist focus desk" called for anti-anarchist whistleblowers stating: "Anarchism is a political philosophy which considers the state undesirable, unnecessary, and harmful, and instead promotes a stateless society, or anarchy. Any information relating to anarchists should be reported to your local police."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/ju...eblower-advice

I'd be astonished if the police did not have an eye on anarchist thugs who mostly attack trade-unionists/public-service workers like the police in particular, put pressure on others like ambulance crew and nurses, and of course harm innocent private businesses, in their destructive wake. They cannot be compared to most other political groups which are prepared to put representatives up for parliament, and generally abide by the rule of law.

Even the odious BNP is prepared to do that ...

[MrGongGong]

I'd be astonished if the police did not have an eye on anarchist thugs who mostly attack trade-unionists/public-service workers like the police in particular, put pressure on others like ambulance crew and nurses, and of course harm innocent private businesses, in their destructive wake. They cannot be compared to most other political groups which are prepared to put representatives up for parliament, and generally abide by the rule of law.

Even the odious BNP is prepared to do that ...

Oh dear scotty you are confused about Anarchism again

[Tony Halstead]

Discuss. I, by the way, can not see how it does not.

Could we please abandon the double negative?
Thus
you do see that "the disenfranchisement of UK prisoners make them all Political prisoners".
To quote Simon

They are not imprisoned because they hold a political view (which would be one sensible definition of a "political prisoner"). Rather, they are imprisoned because they have chosen not to obey the rules that most other members of the society observe.

exactly so... I don't often agree with Simon but in this matter I do agree with him.

[french frank]

If they had to apply for a postal vote in the constituency where they were registered, I wonder how many would bother? Personally, I wouldn't be too bothered about the odd out-and-out villain getting a vote. But what if it was restricted to those who would be due, or possibly due, to be released within the following five years (i.e. the maximum length of the parliament for which they would be voting), regardless of their crime?

[MrGongGong]

It's a rather academic question really
as we don't even have a representative system (and sadly the chances of that are lost for a long time indeed)
so for all the blustering of Dave and chums in matters little
though i'm looking forward to them having to introduce prisoner voting
the humility will do the bastards some good IMV