> Referring to people as “felons” is such a terrible and dehumanising practice.
I don't think there's anyone who could reasonably argue that reform isn't needed to American justice. However I think it's absolutely necessary, and not dehumanizing, to be able to identify someone as having incomplete incarceration status and the level of criminal conduct.
A felon is commonly used to refer to a person who has been convicted of a crime and particularly (but not only) whose sentence is not yet completed. Is that dehumanizing? Perhaps, but I don't currently think it is.
There are legal actions necessary when engaging with someone convicted of certain types of crimes. Certain crimes in the USA prohibit you from owning a gun even after your sentence is served. Sure, I think that is dehumanizing (sentence is served, so why are there additional restrictions?) but the legal requirement to be able to identify such persons doesn't make it dehumanizing on its own, it just makes it necessary.
What words would you use to describe such a person?
> A felon is commonly used to refer to a person who has been convicted of a crime and particularly (but not only) whose sentence is not yet completed.
Not, though. According to Wikipedia:
“The status and designation as a "felon" is considered permanent and is not extinguished upon sentence completion even if parole, probation or early release was given.” https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Felony
And a felony is defined differently in different states. And since such a wide variety of crimes are classified as felonies it is really hard to usefully draw any conclusions other than “person convicted of a felony at some point in their life” which is hardly useful. Could be a stone cold killer, could be a tax evader. Who knows? A felon is a felon.
Thank you for engaging constructively on this discussion.
Losing the right to privacy should be part of the punishment. After enough convictions or offenses large enough tracking your location and/or randomly searching your house shouldn't be a big deal. Lower the prison sentence and fines accordingly.
inetknght|1 year ago
I don't think there's anyone who could reasonably argue that reform isn't needed to American justice. However I think it's absolutely necessary, and not dehumanizing, to be able to identify someone as having incomplete incarceration status and the level of criminal conduct.
A felon is commonly used to refer to a person who has been convicted of a crime and particularly (but not only) whose sentence is not yet completed. Is that dehumanizing? Perhaps, but I don't currently think it is.
There are legal actions necessary when engaging with someone convicted of certain types of crimes. Certain crimes in the USA prohibit you from owning a gun even after your sentence is served. Sure, I think that is dehumanizing (sentence is served, so why are there additional restrictions?) but the legal requirement to be able to identify such persons doesn't make it dehumanizing on its own, it just makes it necessary.
What words would you use to describe such a person?
mdekkers|1 year ago
Not, though. According to Wikipedia:
“The status and designation as a "felon" is considered permanent and is not extinguished upon sentence completion even if parole, probation or early release was given.” https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Felony
And a felony is defined differently in different states. And since such a wide variety of crimes are classified as felonies it is really hard to usefully draw any conclusions other than “person convicted of a felony at some point in their life” which is hardly useful. Could be a stone cold killer, could be a tax evader. Who knows? A felon is a felon.
Thank you for engaging constructively on this discussion.
6510|1 year ago
nathanaldensr|1 year ago
mdekkers|1 year ago