- Cassini-Huygens Mission status report

"Scott Lowther" wrote in message
...
Not the proper newsgroup (it never is), but a seriously valid arguement
can be made for the position that once a convicted person has been
through their imprisonment, paroled and fianlly fully free, all civil
rights should be returned.

Possibly, but it doesn't change the fact that his arguement is disingenuous,
at best. Until the law changes, and I don't see any reason why it should,
the facts, as shown on his own website, show that he was convicted of a
crime. If you've abused the rights of others, then your rights should be
taken away.

I have less of a problem with some rights, such as the right to vote, being
automatically reinstated some time after incarceration or probation is over,
the time being partially dependent on the length of the original sentence,
where no other violations of the law are on the record during the time
between the end of such incarceration or probation and the time of rights
restoral. That is, as long as no other violation of the law is on the record
(creating a presumption of reform), certain rights should be automatically
restored after a period of time. "Automatic" meaning that a review is
automatically scheduled, and that the presumtion should be restoration
unless there is just cause not to do so.

Scott Hedrick wrote:

"Scott Lowther" wrote in message
...
Not the proper newsgroup (it never is), but a seriously valid arguement
can be made for the position that once a convicted person has been
through their imprisonment, paroled and fianlly fully free, all civil
rights should be returned.

Possibly, but it doesn't change the fact that his arguement is disingenuous,
at best. Until the law changes, and I don't see any reason why it should,
the facts, as shown on his own website, show that he was convicted of a
crime. If you've abused the rights of others, then your rights should be
taken away.

I know none of the specifics of this particular case, nor do I care. I
just ahve a general problem with the notion that someone loses rights
more or less in perpetuity even after they have "paid their debt to
society."

And of course, if someone has been wrognly convicted and can prove it,
then all rights should be automatically restored ASAP and some sort of
restitution made.

The converse of this would be if someone committed a "right specific"
crime such as voter fraud, adn the judge imposed a specific lifetime ban
as a result.


--
Scott Lowther, Engineer
Remove the obvious (capitalized) anti-spam
gibberish from the reply-to e-mail address

In article ,
Scott Lowther wrote:

And of course, if someone has been wrognly convicted and can prove it,
then all rights should be automatically restored ASAP and some sort of
restitution made.

Even absent that, provisions exist to restore the rights of felons by
petition to the appropriate courts. Anyone convicted felon who feels
truly entitled to have his rights restored is certainly entitled to try
and have them restored. If this fellow hasn't done so, there is
probably a reason.

--
Herb Schaltegger, B.S., J.D.
Reformed Aerospace Engineer
Columbia Loss FAQ:
http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss_faq_x.html

"Hop David" wrote in message
...

In Lynch's sig is this URL: http://keithlynch.net/. There he tells his
story of being convicted for a burglary he didn't commit.

Very Kafkaesque.

"Herb Schaltegger" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Scott Lowther wrote:

And of course, if someone has been wrognly convicted and can prove it,
then all rights should be automatically restored ASAP and some sort of
restitution made.

Even absent that, provisions exist to restore the rights of felons by
petition to the appropriate courts. Anyone convicted felon who feels
truly entitled to have his rights restored is certainly entitled to try
and have them restored. If this fellow hasn't done so, there is
probably a reason.

It could depend on the state.
http://www.washtimes.com/upi-breakin...0559-3365r.htm discusses
the case in Florida, where restoration is not automatic, and, until Jeb
Bush's recent action, the backlog was multiple years long. According to
http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1032128694425, Virginia (Mr. Lynch's
state as of his incarceration) disenfranchises ex-felons.

On Mon, 28 Jun 2004 13:48:55 -0400, "Ami Silberman"
wrote:


"Hop David" wrote in message
...

In Lynch's sig is this URL: http://keithlynch.net/. There he tells his
story of being convicted for a burglary he didn't commit.

Very Kafkaesque.

....How so? Nothing there about turning into a cockroach :-)


OM

--

"No ******* ever won a war by dying for | http://www.io.com/~o_m
his country. He won it by making the other | Sergeant-At-Arms
poor dumb ******* die for his country." | Human O-Ring Society

- General George S. Patton, Jr

"Scott Lowther" wrote in message
...
I
just ahve a general problem with the notion that someone loses rights
more or less in perpetuity even after they have "paid their debt to
society."

Unless, of course, the permanent loss of rights *is* part of paying that
debt.

And of course, if someone has been wrognly convicted and can prove it,
then all rights should be automatically restored ASAP and some sort of
restitution made.

I agree wholeheartedly.

"OM" om@our_blessed_lady_mary_of_the_holy_NASA_researc h_facility.org wrote
in message ...
...How so? Nothing there about turning into a cockroach :-)

Speaking of which, I wish my office had a window that opens. I just let fly
with a LaDonna that's about to drive me out of the room.

Scott Hedrick wrote:

"Scott Lowther" wrote in message
...
I
just ahve a general problem with the notion that someone loses rights
more or less in perpetuity even after they have "paid their debt to
society."

Unless, of course, the permanent loss of rights *is* part of paying that
debt.

I'd buy that, if that was a part of the sentence handed down by
judge/jury. Having "permanent loss of rights" simply stamped onto every
conviction is goofy.

As it is, there are a boatload of ex-cons who are perfectly decent
members of society (usual story: dumbass as a teen, typically with drugs
or booze), but who will probably never get to be full members of society
again. This puts a stamp on their minds as "outsiders."


--
Scott Lowther, Engineer
Remove the obvious (capitalized) anti-spam
gibberish from the reply-to e-mail address

In article ,
Scott Lowther wrote:

As it is, there are a boatload of ex-cons who are perfectly decent
members of society (usual story: dumbass as a teen, typically with drugs
or booze), but who will probably never get to be full members of society
again. This puts a stamp on their minds as "outsiders."


It's also bull****. If their stories are truly that simple, then
petitioning a U.S. District Court for re-enfranchisement and restoration
of rights should be their first order of business, shouldn't it?

--
Herb Schaltegger, B.S., J.D.
Reformed Aerospace Engineer
Columbia Loss FAQ:
http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss_faq_x.html