Votes for prisoners

What about the prisoner's victims they have lost something regardless. If you don't want to do time don't do a crime.

Thanks for the pithy comment!

Ian42 That is a very trite comment that is easy to say but shows very little understanding of what leads people to offending behaviour. Sometimes it is poverty and deprivation, sometimes it is trauma and stress, other times it may be greed or need, low self esteem or mental health issues.

For example there are many adults in prison because they are undiagnosed dyslexics and they failed miserably at school and became disaffected and truanted from school and fell into antisocial behaviour and criminality through frustration and the inability to cope.

Far too many people in prison were in care when they were children.

There are many issues that we should address as a society and many conditions and circumstances that could be changed if we worked together and took some responsibility for the care of the most vulnerable members of our society.

Of course prisoners should have the vote if for no other reason that they know how society fails.

Which of those groups would you have put lord archer into?

Archer obviously suffered from low self esteem, as he felt the need to exaggerate all his achievements and lie about his past. I don't like him and I think he is a rotten novelist, but that does not mean we should not look behind his personality to try to understand how he became greedy and a liar.
I don't think we can take one famous person as a template for all prisoners - we don't know what drives everyone to crime, but I think glitabo's post is both compassionate and reasonable. I hope people will read what she/he has said and not just dismiss it out of hand.

jeni

Wouldn't this be an ideal opportunity to teach people about democracy, how our laws are made, the difference between the legislature and the judiciary, etc. etc., which many prisoners won't have much idea about? After lessons and discussion they could then be allowed to vote, although I don't think long-term prisoners who will be there for the rest of their lives should have this privilege.

The education system within prisons is far from perfect, but many do provide citizenship and social studies courses as well as basics such as literacy and numeracy.

Unfortunately Lord Archer was never punished properly, he should had his peerage taken away.

I don't think a mechanism exists for removing a peerage. Contempt of court was a bad thing to do but nothing like so bad as his offences against English Literature.

I think they've now said inany future cases where peers are jailed they can no longer sit in the house.

Was tempted to suggest beheading could be brought back for peers who commit offences. Think of the money from the TV rights.

Archer - not contempt of court but perjury - in my book that's incredibly serious - you lie on oath and the can legislate on your release!!And look what Bkack was guilty of..

I looked up Lord Kagan for another thread and found that his knighthood could be taken away but not his peerage. Something wrong there.

Personally I'd take away all titles - utter tosh!!

I don't mean just for prisoners - start with the Queen and work upwards!

Is anyone upwards of the Queen?

Greatnan Everyone.

Bluebell Sorry. I knew it was something like contempt of court but couldn't put my finger on it. Yes, I appreciate that perjury is a very serious offence and there is something that sticks in the craw about the man now being allowed to sit in the House of Lords. But I was being slightly flippant about his wholly dreadful books.