It was strange reading Sen Jeanne Kohl-Welles' op-ed yesterday calling for tough laws against "cyberbullies" (i.e. people who write mean things on web pages) at the same time that she is sponsoring a bill to expedite the restoration of voting rights to convicted felons, who are real bullies. The felon voting bill would, for example, restore the franchise to sex offenders who have been released from incarceration but have not made restitution to their victims. As it happens, there are a number of Level 3 Sex offenders living in Sen. Kohl-Welles northwest Seattle district. According to the King County Sheriff's Dept. --
Level 3 offenders are considered to have a high risk to re-offend. They usually have one or more victims and may have committed prior crimes of violence. They may not know their victim(s). The crime may show a manifest cruelty to the victim(s) and these offenders usually deny or minimize the crime. These offenders commonly have clear indications of a personality disorder.Talk about bullies. These are the number of Level 3 offenders in Sen. Kohl-Welles neighborhood whose voting rights she wants to restore, and the crimes they committed --
| Offense |
Number of Offenders
|
| Attempted Rape 2nd degree |
1
|
| Child Molestation 1st degree |
15
|
| Child Molestation 3rd degree |
2
|
| Indecent Liberties |
3
|
| Rape 1st degree |
1
|
| Rape 2nd degree |
2
|
| Rape 3rd degree |
2
|
| Rape of a Child 1st degree |
3
|
| Rape of a Child 2nd degree |
2
|
| Rape of a Child 3rd degree |
2
|
| Sexual Assault |
1
|
| Statutory Rape 1st degree |
2
|
| Statutory Rape 2nd degree |
1
|
It's hard enough to stomach that all of these dangerous creeps are living amongst us. But just because we've decided as a society to keep them locked up for only a few years before releasing them to the community does not mean we need to include their voices in community decisions. Sen. Kohl-Welles, on the other hand, thinks their opinions are as valid as those of their victims. I'm wondering how the UW Women's Studies Dept., where Sen. Kohl-Welles lectures, might feel about hosting a debate between Sen. Kohl-Welles and a rape victim on the question whether to expedite the restoration of voting rights to convicted rapists.
Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at January 20, 2006
12:52 PM | Email This
I find it particularly humorous to note the tendency of liberal trolls to pay attention to any extraneous diversion
they can to ignore the point of these "cyberbully" threads.
While it is pretty difficult to evade the disparity in comparisons between people who write mean things on web pages, and those who have been convicted of attempted rape, child molestation, indecent liberties, rape, and sexual assault, I’m pretty sure the liberal twits will find a way.
You know . . . everything's relative.
Couldn’t possibly have anything to do with the fact that,
“when they do get to vote, convicts and ex-cons tend to Pull the lever for the Left,” would it?
Gotcha politics, a la 21st Century Washington!
Take that you left wing loony tune!!!
Posted by: A Watchdog on January 20, 2006 02:32 PMI've even more suspicious when you make arguments as emotionally charged and intellectually unconvincing as to say that allowing felons to vote means that one "thinks their opinions are as valid as those of their victims." I happen to think my opinions are more valid than anyone else's, but I don't conclude that no one else should be allowed to vote. :-)
There is certainly an argument to be made that serious law-breakers don't deserve a voice in law-making. There is certainly also an argument to be made that evryone impacted by the law deserves a voice in shaping it -- and that includes felons. In the end, I don't find one of these moralist viewpoints significantly more convincing than the other.
What I do find convicing is this: when one starts to try to try to prevent felon voting, the accounting gets very messy. What about felons convicted in other states? What if their crime wouldn't be a felony in Washington? What if their crime would be a felony in Washington, but wasn't where they were convicted? What if they committed the felony as a juvinile, but weren't released until they had reached majority? Who keeps track of all this stuff?
Good voting rights regulations should be simple. Whenever they are complex and difficult to enforce they become subject to incompetence and manipulation. That could be targeted laxity (Washington) or targeted enforcement (Florida). For me, this practical argument tips the balance.
Frankly, the whole debate gives me a bad feeling. Does it worry anyone else that a law passed by a simple majority can regulate the voting rights of a minority? Where does it stop? I would much prefer that voting rights be fixed constitutionally and not subject to democratic politics.
Wrong.
Your arguments are empty, disingenuous, and pitifully self absorbed.
You say, "I've even more suspicious when you make arguments as emotionally charged and intellectually unconvincing as to say that allowing felons to vote means that one "thinks their opinions are as valid as those of their victims." I happen to think my opinions are more valid than anyone else's, but I don't conclude that no one else should be allowed to vote.
No one here claims that "no one else should be allowed to vote,"ding dong . . . just convicted felons.
Those who operate outside of the law have a vested interest in electing those into power who weaken it. If this is too difficult for you to countenance, it is because you have bought into a relativist world view that fails to make important distinctions. Do you drink from the toilet?
Have your ass kicked in, or a family member murdered or raped or both only to watch the perpetrator walk away because of idiotic liberal Democrat criminal justice policies . . . then say you like the idea of felons convicted of murder, assaulting women, child molestation, indecent liberties, rape, and sexual assault, and attempted rape, deciding on an equal basis along side you who is elected to represent us all. These are vile disgusting people who relinquished most of their rights when they violated those of others. Should any of the horrible things they do come into your life personally, and you still maintain the same ludicrous views, there is no hope for you. Who knows . . . maybe one of these guys you regard as your equal will solve your problem . . . know what I mean?
Your key statement is, "Frankly, the whole debate gives me a bad feeling." You are way too impressed with your phony feeeeelings. This isn’t about your feeeeelings, but about your resolve to do the right thing based on rationality and common sense.
Murderers, rapists, child molesters and perpetrators of many other criminal activities enjoy exploiting the immature outlook you display so they can do whatever they like to you and yours. Wise up or shut up.
You are part of the problem.