By Matthew Hayward
In the land of liberty, a peculiar and troubling paradox exists. A citizen, once confined within the walls of a prison, is under the care and protection of the state. Upon release, they are thrust back into society, expected to fend for themselves, yet stripped of their fundamental rights to self-protection and participation in the democratic process.
The Second Amendment, a cornerstone of American freedom, is denied to many who have paid their debt to society. But the injustice doesn't end there. The right to vote, the very essence of a democratic society, is often withheld as well.
Imagine a bird, caged for years, finally set free but with clipped wings and a silenced song. Such is the plight of the released prisoner, expected to navigate life without the means to protect themselves or the voice to influence the society they rejoin.
The state's duty to protect does not end at the prison gate, nor does its obligation to uphold the principles of our Constitutional Republic. If a person is deemed unsafe or unready to have their rights, they should not be released. But if they are free, their rights must be fully restored.
The right to vote should not be suspended even if incarcerated. After all, the principles of a democratic system demand that every voice be heard, regardless of circumstance. To deny the vote is to silence a segment of the population, skewing the political landscape and undermining the very foundations of our great nation.
A Global Perspective:
In Canada, prisoners retain the right to vote, even while incarcerated. This policy aligns with the philosophy that the right to vote is fundamental and should not be denied.
Norway emphasizes rehabilitation and reintegration into society. Prisoners retain the right to vote, and there is a focus on preparing inmates for life after prison, including restoring rights.
These countries' policies reflect a more nuanced approach to prisoners' rights, recognizing the importance of both the right to self-protection and the right to participate in the democratic process. They may provide valuable examples for reform and align more closely with the principles that define our society.
The state must either restore the rights or assume responsibility for the safety and voice of those it has disarmed and silenced. Anything less is a betrayal of the principles upon which this great nation was founded.
![]() |
Comments
Post a Comment