News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
Convicted of drug crime? Should never lose right to vote.
Convicted of violent crime? Should regain right to vote upon release.
Convicted of trying to overturn an election? Never get to vote again.
They should all be able to vote. From prison, too. The punishment never needs to be to take their voting rights away. If they commit fraud, stop them from committing fraud again.
I think if you're overthrowing the government, you're basically tapping out of the democracy. That's literally the only crime I could see not being allowed to vote. I also think they should be removed from the country they tried to destroy. But then I have no idea how would they remain detained in that situation.
If they are not allowed to vote then by all rights they shouldn't be taxed as well.
Yup. I'm good for that. Prisoners shouldn't be making enough to be taxed.
So we just make them legitimate sovereign citizens?
What happens when they start to organize and try to create a new country within the United States?
Edit: weird downvotes, I'm asking questions
Make a new permanent US penal colony, call it New Australia, located in Texas. TX as been wanting to secede anyway, let's give them a helping hand. Deport all seditionists there with all visa/passport privileges being revoked.
And the final chef's-kiss: Enact all of the cruel immigration laws against New Australia that they've been wanting so bad, see how they like it.
Hmmm, the more I think about it the more I like this plan. I vote for New Australia. It fits U.S. naming conventions too!
What's your understanding of "sovereign citizen"? Asking in good faith.
I mean, we have Amish in the US. That's a kind of sovereign citizen, right?
Well I'm basing it off of the google definition..
I mean we'd basically be making them the same thing, no? Only legitimate?
I see what you're saying
The Amish are just members of a fairly extreme religion. They don't reject the existence of government itself. Sovereign citizens are people that believe they aren't subject to the laws of the country the reside in.
I'd prefer compulsory voting from all able people of voting age. Prisons should have full in-person voting locations with private voting booths. Mail-in ballots should be a freely available option for all.
It doesn't guarantee good results, but I feel it is the most straightforward way to rid ourselves of voter suppression campaigns, which I think are fundamentally evil.
What's the punishment for failing to vote? It would just end up being a poor tax.
It's not much of a tax when it can be "paid" by sending a piece of paper through the mail, postage-paid.
Australia does this. It works out very well.
Hey, you're talking to the country that has you actively apply to get a right to vote. The US is seemingly incapable of keeping track of their own citizens.
Give the IRS more funding and we will have little trouble keeping track of everyone.
Yeah, I just wrote another comment and noticed that the government probably has addresses because the IRS needs those to function.
Homeless people will rejoice for sure.
Homeless people get counted on the census.
They don't consistently receive mail and are often on drugs. Fines for not voting are absurd.
Do you think that's how it works in Australia, where voting is compulsory? Or do you think they've found ways to accommodate for that?
I'd hope they accommodate for it. I don't trust the US government to not fuck it up.
Personally I hate the concept of compulsory almost anything. If you have a right to vote you have a right to protest elections as well.
Compulsory voting doesn't mean you literally have to vote for something. You can cast a blank ballot in protest. Sales tax is compulsory. Gas tax is compulsory. There are lots of things that are already compulsory.
I disagree with this approach without even touching the morality aspect.
There should be no way to lose your voting rights once you are of age and a citizen of the US for the very simple reason of limiting the bureaucratic overhead of elections. If every citizen above the age of 18 can vote, you can just completely remove the ridiculous notion of "voter registration".
Just register everyone based on their legal address (which the government should have anyway because taxes). Just like a real democracy.
I agree with this.
Even people who make mistakes should be entitled to vote. Even while paying for their mistakes frankly. They may have lost their freedom, but they are still citizens of the Republic.
The only compelling argument I know of is that voting in local elections is a mess because there would be counties that'd suffer from the over representation due to the location of the prisons. I would just consider those to be absentee voters myself, and they just keep the last address they had before going in or next if kin instead.
Just my thoughts
But muh rights?
I disagree with violent crime, they should entirely lose the right to vote. There's no room in our society for behavior like that
I got a felony 14 years ago for running from a cop. He got a scratch on his hand and charged me with aggravated assault on a law enforcement officer. Bogus public defender didn't even help try to fight for me and their charges stuck like glue.
If the number of violent criminals in your society is enough to affect the outcome of an election, you've got much bigger problems. And if you take away the right to vote for violent crimes, politicians will attempt to redefine what "violent" means to disenfranchise more people.
I hate to break it to you, but here in the U.S. we definitely have much bigger problems
Thanks, I hadn't noticed.
Keeping a person out of our society is not done by revoking the right to vote, it's done by giving them a life sentence.
Are people capable of changing?
I don't know why you think the people who commit financial crimes should be able to vote then.
What about white collars that steal so much money they literally ruin people's lives?
Please engage with me.