Current prisoners should have the right to vote.

I will be using the same format for rebuttals as what my opponent stated in round 2. I will address what was he has said in round 3 later in round 4. The following rebuttals will be address my opponent's arguments in round 2. I will now begin.RE: There are people in prison for crimes that majority think shouldn't be a crime, why should they be denied the right to vote?I would first like to point out an honest error in my opponent's statistic. "yet there are currently 2.2 million people in prison for marijuana possession." The way the site is set up, it gave the impression that this number is for those in prison for marijuana offenses. However, the 2.2 million is the total individuals incarcerated in the U.S. in federal, state, and local prisons in 2014. [2] The actual number of those imprisoned for marijuana offenses is 40,000, and about half are in for possession alone. [3] The total U.S. population, as of 3/12/17 9:39 P.M. is 325,761,778. [4] When calculated, this means that those imprisoned for marijuana possession only account for .0123% of the population. Whether these individuals have the right to vote or not would not influence the vote on whether or not to legalize marijuana. I would also like to point out that the 2.2 million incarcerated number include those who are in jail. Those who are in jail are those who are currently awaiting trial. Currently, most states allow those in jail to vote, [5] so those who have not been proven guilty of a crime still have a voice in the democratic process.RE: If society is the one who decides the laws, certain laws may never be removed because you're removing the suffrage of people who would want to get rid of that law.I've already calculated the example given in the previous argument and proven that it would have no effect on a given election. Also, most controversial or debated laws do not have serious penalties. Most would result in a fine or little prison time. Also, when laws are passed, most citizens who disagree with it would still follow the law until the law is changed or abolished. This is what it means to be a law-abiding citizen.RE: The right to vote is a very important right, and it would need a compelling reason to take it away from an individual.I agree that what can be defined as a crime is subjective. However, citizens get to vote on candidates who decide what is enough to take away the rights of individuals. When a law is passed that defines a certain crime, it is expected of law-abiding citizens that they follow that law, and, if they wish for the law to be changed or abolished, they vote on a candidate that would achieve that for them. When offenders disobey these laws, they are no longer following the process in which their country has established. They are well aware that they will lose some of their basic rights as a citizen when they offend. I argue that if an individual cannot follow the laws of their country, the deserve to lose the right to vote while incarcerated.RE: There can be people in prison innocent of the crime, should they have their right to vote taken away?Yes, unfortunately, the justice system cannot be perfect and innocent people will be imprisoned. I cannot refute this. However, what my opponent is arguing is that since innocent people are being imprisoned, although a small number, punishments should be taken away. I argue that making punishments less severe because innocent people are convicted is not reasonable. "Even if there is one innocent person who has their right to vote taken away for ever 1,000,000 people who actually committed the crime, I don't think it justifies taking the right to vote away from prisoners." 1,000,000 people is a lot of people and would have drastic effects on an election in comparison to the one individual. This statement comes down to opinion and can be compared to one of those "Would you rathers." I believe that the effects would be too drastic for one innocent citizen. While it is sad that an individual could be wrongly convicted, I argue that it does not outweigh the overall number of prisoners who have been convicted rightfully.I believe I have addressed what I wanted to address and now give my opponent his turn, where I await his final rebuttals and conclusion.[2] http://www.drugpolicy.org... [3] http://www.rollingstone.com...[4] http://www.worldometers.info... [5] https://www.prisonersofthecensus.org...