In this world (ie. not in a perfect world) prisoners should get the vote.

Rebuttals You say that it still has a little negative effect. I don't think its necessarily negative, there is nobody to vote for who would be doing such negative things. What do you mean when you say 'negative'? Who are you expecting them to vote for? In a 'First-past-the post' electoral system, the candidate with the most votes wins the seat, making all votes for other candidates meaningless. So, just because the prison population is 1% of the whole population, it wouldn't make up 1% of parliament if it where allowed the vote. Even if there where candidates in every constituency, whose philosophy aided the criminals, not one would come to Parliament. Only if roughly 49% of the non-criminal voters also voted for the candidate, making him legitimate anyway. So I hope this argument is settled now, as I have shown how giving them the vote does nothing to politics. Additional point: Although I say they have no effect on politics in my last point, they actually do have a slight positive one. At least from my perspective. That is they will probably vote the left wing parties, and this encourages social change. This next point is referring to your point on taking away rights and freedom: You basically argue that they have no rights, or at least not the right to vote. I don't disagree with you. I think that if you rape, indiscriminately murder or are just an unpleasant violent person, then you don't deserve to vote. This is not about that though. You are not exactly making things nicer for them by giving them a vote every 4 years, they would much prefer cigarettes, an x-box, or freedom. They do need to be punished in order to bring closure to the victim, but I think they also need to be rehabilitated. Not for there sake, but for societies sake. Keeping prisoners is expensive and takes up space. Also, its the most moral thing to do, we cannot be vengeful. We must allow people to change, and if they don't, never let them out. I am not saying be soft on criminals. But our goal should be rehabilitation, not revenge. For all our sakes, not for the person who has done the bad thing. You basically say they don't deserve it, but I think they don't really care either way, so your not exactly making things nicer for them You say: "Encouraging participation in society by someone who has been locked away from society is once again pretty counterproductive." You say its counter-productive. It sounds like it when you say it like that. It is not counter-productive though. As I have explained, an unorganised 1% of the population have actually no effect on government (bar perhaps a tiny boost to the left-wing candidates). That's not counter-productive is it? Helping to re-habilitate them slightly is not counter-productive either. It is in no way counter-productive, at worst it has no effect. Your next point on disengagement from society: You say: "the type of person they are, is (probably) not one that wishes to truly be a part of society" Yes but that's the problem. That's why reminding them that society listens to them, by allowing them the vote, is a good thing. It helps them believe they are members and are part of a community. People aren't just the "type" of people that don't want to engage. They are pushed out and need reeling in. You say: "We work for companies who keep the economy stable and continue/enable the growth and expansion of the human race. Coca-Cola is an exception. If they are not locked up for murdering people, then I don't really know what to say. I know there are criminals around us, however the difference is that those criminals (for the most part) are not detrimental to society in a sense that stops progress of the human race or physically harms someone. Someone who has committed a crime is a criminal. We are not talking about criminals, we are talking about prisoners. There is a difference." Yes there is a difference. But the similarity is that they have acted wrongfully to another. And so my point is that you should not label these people mealy as 'criminals' and see them as alien, devil like non-human individuals. They are just people serving their time. This makes me sound empathetic to the criminals, I am not. This is the key point. I am not saying they deserve to vote, I am saying that taking it away from them is at best pointless, and at worst slightly detrimental to the rest of society. I would not fight for this right. I just believe that if I was in charge, I would not take their vote away. This would be on the grounds that it may encourage them to see that society is 'for them' and not against them, and it isn't going to harm anyone. Let me make it clear once more, this is not about 'rights'. I do believe most criminals don't deserve to have a vote, but I think we should give them it for the good of the wider society. Thank you.