this post was submitted on 18 Feb 2024
1951 points (98.0% liked)

tumblr

3480 readers
2 users here now

Welcome to /c/tumblr, a place for all your tumblr screenshots and news.

Our Rules:

  1. Keep it civil. We're all people here. Be respectful to one another.

  2. No sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia or any other flavor of bigotry. I should not need to explain this one.

  3. Must be tumblr related. This one is kind of a given.

  4. Try not to repost anything posted within the past month. Beyond that, go for it. Not everyone is on every site all the time.

  5. No unnecessary negativity. Just because you don't like a thing doesn't mean that you need to spend the entire comment section complaining about said thing. Just downvote and move on.


Sister Communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Uvine_Umbra@discuss.tchncs.de 5 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

Made a 5 page response at first literally citing the Universal Declaration of Human rights, but others who responded when i was done did much better at explaining, so I will just add:

There's no reason to stop inmates from voting except for preconceived notions that they are any less human or competent than anyone else. I promise you they aren't.

Jury duty? There are already exemptions. Add in prison.

Just being on someone else's property, whether the government, a school, store, etc is a priviledge.

Same with having a job, much less at a type of institution. My awful vision means i am unable to work in the military. Working in the military was never a right in the first place. Nor is working near or at children's institutions.

Driving is a priviledge. Visit a city with good public transit, cycleways, & ample walkways & this will be made obvious. If driving feels like a necesity & thus a right, then that's a problem with your city, but i digress...

Forced labor in prison camps? Basically indentured servitude. Should be voluntary otherwise you lose benefits, nothing like toilets or clothes or food & water for example.

Can't restrict their ability to read books & learn.

No civil asset forfeiture except to pay off charges from trial (fraud, miney laundering, theft, etc), she even so, when they leave they should be returned a check or cash value equivalent to everything they once owned, minus charges from verdict of course. Otherwise it literally becomes police sponsored theft.

[–] sanpedropeddler@sh.itjust.works -1 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Look dude, its very simple. Putting people in prison is limiting their rights. Therefore, punishing criminals requires limiting their rights to some extent. You don't need multiple paragraphs, and you certainly don't need 5 pages.

[–] lolcatnip@reddthat.com 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Look dude, it's very simple: some rights of criminals need to be restricted for practical reasons. Most don't, and those that don't shouldn't be.

[–] sanpedropeddler@sh.itjust.works 0 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Exactly, that's what I'm saying.

[–] lolcatnip@reddthat.com 0 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Ok good. I don't think anyone is really arguing otherwise except for the most hardcore anarchists, who seem like generally unreasonable people. (Like, you're not going to stop anyone from doing whatever they want? What if what they want to do is create a government that enforces its will on everyone?)

[–] Uvine_Umbra@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

Let's say you're correct: ( ignoring that prison isn't a right, but a punishment invocable by breaking law) that's the only right that should be limited. It doesn't justify removing any other right. Do you agree with that?

[–] sanpedropeddler@sh.itjust.works 1 points 10 months ago

Yes, although I think imprisoning someone is limiting more than just one right. And if you don't count restrictions like not being able drive as a right being limited, then I would agree.