966
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] mkwt@lemmy.world 104 points 1 week ago

Felons should be allowed to vote for the felon if they want.

[-] AeonFelis@lemmy.world 10 points 1 week ago

Because they should be allowed to vote in general, or because felons should only be allowed to vote for other felons?

[-] Mango@lemmy.world 15 points 1 week ago
[-] friend_of_satan@lemmy.world 10 points 1 week ago

One big happy felony.

[-] Beaver@lemmy.ca 81 points 1 week ago

Same should go for voting. Felons deserve to vote as well not just run for presidency.

[-] caboose2006@lemmy.ca 32 points 1 week ago

Prisoners deserve to vote

[-] queue@lemmy.blahaj.zone 64 points 1 week ago

I agree, but we all know the state and landlords won't do that. It's us vs the rich. The rich want the poor to be good brainwashed workers, and if you did anything the state said is now illegal (being homeless) then you deserve zero of your constitutional rights!

Just dumb founding that Trump can just walk around freely and raise more money from his crimes, and yet people are arrested for shoplifting needed supplies, and squater's rights are removed on empty yet perfectly fine private property.

[-] rozodru@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 week ago

well it depends. is said Felon rich and/or someone of influence/celebrity? then those "rules" suddenly go out the window. There's plenty of people of influence and celebrity that are felons and they get by just fine.

Been in a movie? successful album? on tv? oh you're a felon? well i'm sure you're still an upstanding citizen. oh you've done none of the above? and you're a felon? sorry I can't work with you.

load more comments (80 replies)
[-] GoofSchmoofer@lemmy.world 33 points 1 week ago

How about if a person successfully and fully completes their sentence associated with the felony(s) that they were charged with the felony is removed from their record.

We as a country have decided that certain punishments are meted out for certain crimes. If the person serves the punishment that we the people have decided is appropriate then why are they still saddled with the sentence of their former crime after the punishment is served?

[-] EatATaco@lemm.ee 7 points 1 week ago

Reductio ad absurdum: Felony conviction for child molestation. Removed from record. Should they have free reign to be able to apply for any job, even if it might involve children?

[-] GoofSchmoofer@lemmy.world 10 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

You are talking about the conviction, I am talking about the punishment. We the people of this country decide what the punishments are for crimes.

So in the case of a murder conviction it maybe decided that this person has to be incarcerated for 20 years. They do their time and released. They did the punishment We decided as appropriate for the crime. They are done.

In your example again We the people get to decide the punishment. It could be (and probably is) part of the punishment that a convicted child molester can never have a job working with people under a certain age. Maybe in this case the punishment can never fully be carried out so they always carry the moniker of felon/child molester.

All I'm saying is that for those crimes that have a definitive start and end point for the punishment there should be a qualifying start and end point for the title of felon.

[-] EatATaco@lemm.ee 1 points 1 week ago

I find your distinction to be arbitrary. You could argue that punishment for child sex abuse should have a beginning and an end, or you can argue that the punishment for a felony conviction does not end when you get out of prison.

I work in finance, and I certainly would not want to bring on someone who was convicted of felony security fraud working for the firm, because it ours everything in jeopardy.

[-] GoofSchmoofer@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

I'm not arguing how we punish people I'm arguing why do we punish people What's the point of putting a person in jail or prison for some length of time if, when the get out they are still saddled with their crime?

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] edgemaster72@lemmy.world 17 points 1 week ago

Felonies for me, not for thee

[-] cumskin_genocide@lemm.ee 7 points 1 week ago

As a registered SO this would make my life a lot better.

[-] BillMurray@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago

Hold on, is this Trump's actual account?

[-] cumskin_genocide@lemm.ee 4 points 1 week ago

Yes and when I win the presidency in November I will force you to make ghost buster movies until you die. The best part is that no one will ever believe you when you tell them the that.

[-] yo_scottie_oh@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 week ago

Oh, we’re keeping the box—as a requirement for the job, not a disqualification.

[-] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago
[-] DAMunzy@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 week ago

Sounds good. And Congress should be paid minimum wage (meaning that minimum wage needs to be raised).

[-] Timecircleline@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 week ago

That would make it so that 1) only independently wealthy people make up congress and/or 2) congress would be highly susceptible to bribery.

I kind of wish that people could vote on their wages though. Like instead of congress just voting to give themselves a raise, each congress person needed to present on why they would deserve it which is then voted on by the public.

[-] DAMunzy@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 week ago

Please read where I said minimum wage needs to be raised.

[-] Timecircleline@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 week ago

I agree that minimum wage should be raised and should provide a basic standard of living.

I worry that if the wage isn't an attractor or the same skills have significantly higher value in the private sector, then the right people will be less likely to want to do it. And not out of selfishness, but out of wanting to provide more than the basic standard of living for their family.

It's hard to justify passion work even if it pays livable wages (which an increased minimum wage should) if you might work fewer hours for more money and have more time to spend with your family.

[-] Anticorp@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

Do we have more than a couple people in Congress that were not already rich when they started running their campaign?

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 02 Jul 2024
966 points (97.7% liked)

Housing Bubble 2: Return of the Ugly

141 readers
133 users here now

A community for discussing and documenting the second great housing bubble.

founded 2 months ago
MODERATORS