Comments on: The State Attorney Who Declined to Pursue Sex Offenders for Voting

By: D.A. Dorsett

D.A. Dorsett — Sat, 10 Jun 2023 12:51:19 +0000

The reasons are because unlike GOD AMurdiKKKA sees some crimes as more severe than others. It’s not right but it’s what the forefathers and his kids legislated throughout the years. It is the laws written and was really intended for black slaves and poor whites and others and in that order.

By: BWJ

BWJ — Sat, 10 Jun 2023 12:08:22 +0000

In reply to JJJJ. Excellent question. I hope that you get a response.

By: JJJJ

JJJJ — Sat, 10 Jun 2023 02:52:06 +0000

Here is the contents of an email that I sent to the authors of this new story: (I sent this to another newspaper, as well.)
Hello:
I would like to ask you to report on one question that puzzles so many of us; namely, why the carveout in the first place?
Why sex offenders and murderers? Why not armed robbers and arsonists? Why not purse snatchers and carjackers?
What, exactly, makes a former sex offender or murderer less qualified to vote than any other ex-felon?
There is, to my mind, absolutely no logical reason for this carveout except for plain, blind hatred.
In my opinion, if a person does a crime, then they should be prosecuted and sentenced, if they are found guilty.
After they have fully served their sentence, then they should be as free as any other person. Isn’t that the way that justice should work??