Out from the crowd ...and proud!

Lunatics running the asylum

Well they have been for a few years now, but I've just read this (and the comments) at it made me want to rant.

A while ago, there was a case brought to the European Court of Human Rights by ex-prisoner John Hirst about prisoners getting the right to vote. I remember being very much against any such idea at the time and my views have not changed in the slightest since then.

Yesterday, I posted a comment on Iain Dale's blog stating my opinion regarding the issue. This is what I said:

I can't believe anyone has come up with such a ludicrous idea (in my opinion). Other than the most basic human rights that keep them alive, prisoners should have no rights. If you don't want to do the time, don't do the crime (but reintroduce "innocent until proven guilty").

I would like to emphasise again how I think that prisoners should have no rights. If you have committed a crime then you should have to pay your debt to society. In my opinion, this includes losing all the rights you would enjoy as a law abiding citizen. This includes the right to vote.

I know that opinions on both sides of this debate are controversial. People may think that I support the idea of political prisoners having no rights. I don't. I think of prisoners (in this country, and any other democracy) as those who have been sent to prison because they have committed a crime serious enough to warrant their removal from society. It is very important that the principle of "innocent until proven guilty" is upheld at all times.

I would like to end by quoting another commenter (going by the name of RK) on Iain Dale's blog, who put it far better than I ever could.

You may have won a round in court but the majority of people in this country will find this ruling intolerable and ultimately democracy is rule by the people and not rule by court order.

Hear, hear!

posted by Average guy on the street @ 4:50 pm