http://michiganmessenger.com/23590/d...-public-office
Printable View
No no no no - hell no!!!
from http://michiganmessenger.com/23590/d...-public-officeQuote:
Originally Posted by Michigan Messenger
Please, MsChievous and Mr. Lynn, when you guys get on the Charter Commission ban all felons from running for any elected position in Detroit.
Thanks.
I think the types of felonies need to be specified. To prohibit someone from public office because they failed to have a lifejacket in a canoe or kayak [[yes, that's a felony in Michigan) would be a little extreme, imho.
I have to disagree Lilpup. A felon is a felon. The person disobeyed the LAW, no matter what LAW is broken. I believe that public officials have to obey the laws of the land....ALL OF THEM.
A public official who disobeys the law should be removed from office. Perhaps a temporary leave from the time of being charged until the time of being found or pleading guilty, but definitely without ANY type of compensation. If found innocent, repay the compensation back to the date of charge. If found guilty...the citizens and the district lose nothing.
Well, if you're going to be that hard-assed about it - what if they've pleaded 'no contest' [[technically *not* a conviction and not supposed to affect one's criminal record) to a felony?
isnt a blanket ban also a rejection of our criminal justice system? If someone convicted of a felony has been charged, found guilty, sentenced to some form of punishment, and completed that punishment fully, isn't that person "rehabilitated"? Or, are you saying that once a person is found guilty...or pleads no contest.. to a felony they are no longer fit to be a part of society?
Where would Charlie Beckham fit in? He was appointed Deputy Mayor by Dave Bing? Charlie did not run for this office but he is in a powerful position. Perhaps the charter should include no political appointed felons.
According to Bing's Organization Chart, Beckham had been appointed the Chief Adminsitrative Officer not the Deputy Mayor. Where can I find the information that states he's been appointed Deputy Mayor?Quote:
Originally Posted by Wallins
I love felons. They're entertaining to say the least. Thats why I voted for Kwame...TWICE
but he wasn't a felon yet. He wouldn't have been dq'd from running both times you voted for him.Quote:
I love felons. They're entertaining to say the least. Thats why I voted for Kwame...TWICE
No, I don't want felons in office, but if voters re-elect Martha Reeves, they should be charge with a felon for being stupid.
I guess you really can't do anything about appointments besides not re-elect the person that appointed the felon.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wallins
As far as felons being rehabilitated, who would be the first to let a pedophile babysit their young kids, just because the felon served his time and paid his debt to society? I guess this line of thinking is really why I don't want felons in public office. Most of them will just use the office as a way to milk the public. Don't we enough thieves, crooks, liars, and what not robbing us blind already? Do we need to expand to allowing jail birds also to join in the robbing spree? Do we want to open the doors for the likes of Kilpatrick [[who is now a felon) to come back and rob us some more. Granted it would take a stupid voter base to re-elect Kilpatrick, but inner city voters are very forgiving and will accept a tearful apology.
I take the same stance. I don't believe in a blanket ban for that very reason. If society is going to make it so hard for people who've served time to fit back into society, then what is the use in even letting them out, at all? I guess we should just lock up all felons, then, regardless of the offense, for the rest of their lives. What this discrimination does is essentially funnel them back into a life of crime. It's like telling someone to go fishing, but not giving them the pole.Quote:
Originally Posted by bailey
How sad this is. How can you pick or choose which felony a person can be convicted of and still be elected to public office? No judge is going to convict anyone of a felony for not wearing a life jacket. When are the citizens of Detroit going to say enough is enough of public officials stealing their hard earned tax dollars? Isn't anyone even slightly embarrassed of some past and present council members/x-mayors childish, immature, felonious behavior being plastered all over the internet for the whole world to see? This is the first good step Detroit can take to clean up the corruption and let this city heal.
Great idea. Thats what the salt mines and baloney sandwiches are for.Quote:
Originally Posted by MIRepublic
But seriously, if felons can't run for office in Southfield why should they here.
There are plenty of careers an ex-felon can enter rather than politics.
Bingo!!!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Homer
It's a felony in the State of Michigan - how can a judge just throw it out if the person didn't have the equipment on board and the ticket was issued?Quote:
Originally Posted by jbd441
It's a felony if convicted for the third time within 10 years. Sounds like blatant disregard for human life and should be a felony.
So a boater gets a ticket for not having a life perserver on or even in their watercraft. That person goes to court. I can guarantee unless a child's life wasn't threatened, on a guilty plea a judge will in most cases impose a fine and withhold adjudication. I had to sit in court for my job and watched this happen many times.Quote:
Originally Posted by lilpup
In which case the judge doesn't have to "ajudicate" because you've entered a guilty plea into the record. A "no contest" and paying the ticket without going to court would be a better response.Quote:
Originally Posted by jbd441
Bear in mind that many of those convictions can be/could have been pleaded down to a lesser charge, hence murder could be dropped to 2nd degree, still a felony but less time. Those things are done for a number of reasons. So, if you're going to pick your felonies, is 1st and/or 2nd degree murder less palatable than, say, manslaughter? Or look at Criminal Sexual Conduct [[4 degrees); which one is OK? Think about this long and hard.....
Well, they can't posess firearms, get a liquor license, drive a schoolbus, or even vote, so why should they be able to run for elected office?Quote:
Originally Posted by bailey
There ARE ways for to have your record expunged and have your rights restored if you go through the process.
In Michigan, I believe felons have the right to vote if they're not in prison
Quote:
Originally Posted by MsChievous
MsChievous, if you're really going to play this game, why not just ban all convicted criminals from running for office? Do you really want to play this game?
It's ridiculous anyone thinks that this is a the problem, or even a big problem in government. I'd trust a convicted criminal that has served his or her time and looking to do something better in his or her community to do right by the city than a well-meaning incompetent.
Neither are probably optimal cases, but I'm making the point that convicted felons who've served their time are hardly city governments pressing problem if a problem, at all. I've been impressed with you, thus far, but if this kind of discrimination is something you want to lead a crusade against and identify as a big problem or a problem, at all, I seriously question your vision. I guess it shouldn't come as a surprise, to me, though given your former line of work. You all, after all, have always seen those that have served their time as something less than equal citizens.
Hopefully, playing on people's fears, whipping up unnecessary hysteria, and darker emotions for votes won't pay off, for you.
Exactly correct. Anyone convicted of a felony should not be able to run for office or be eligible to hold office even by appointment.Quote:
why not just ban all convicted criminals from running for office?
1. MIR, I'm not 'playing on people's fears', I'm really just trying to get folks to think about what they really want in their city charter. The final decision belongs to the voters and one way to find out what they/you want is to ask. Don't I have a responsibility to give them all the information available? Don't you think Detroiters should do their homework and decide what they want in their elected officials?Quote:
Originally Posted by MIRepublic
2. Actually, it does look as though criminality is a problem in Detroit government.
3. My previous career does not necessarily mean that I view everyone who is convicted of a crime as less than equal citizens.
"2. Actually, it does look as though criminality is a problem in Detroit government. "
There have been and probably are criminals on the loose in Detroit government. The problem is that most of them weren't felons at the time they were committing their crimes. This rule wouldn't have kept MonCon or Kwame from getting elected when they did. I agree that someone convicted of a felony during their term of office needs to be removed. There's no reason that it took the Governor of the State to remove the Mayor after he was convicted of perjury and found to have cost the city millions of dollars. Even if the felony is unrelated to your office, there's a certain standard for holding office that needs to apply and a felony conviction for any reason violates that standard.
Beyond that, if voters make the choice to elect a known felon to office, I'm not sure that should be prevented, although anyone convicted of a violation of the public trust or abuse of their office should never be allowed to hold office again. This debate reminds me of the argument for term limits, which stated that voters had to be stopped from voting in people that were going to fleece them. At a certain point, voters have to be held accountable for their actions and who they elect to office.
Bingo. I can definitely agree with that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Novine