The Feb. 17 editorial, They paid their debt, supported restoring voting rights for convicted felons who haven’t been convicted of violent or sex crimes. But what rational, intellectual basis is there for giving Ponzi schemers like Scott Rothstein and Bernie Madoff the right to vote, but not rapists? They’ve all committed terrible crimes that have injured thousands of victims. Your rationale seems to be that “states shouldn’t continue to punish Americans after they have paid their debt to society.” If that’s a sufficient reason to give felons the right to vote, why isn’t it also a sufficient reason to give felons the right to possess firearms? There are federal and state laws that criminalize possession of guns by felons. Does the Herald want to eliminate those laws?
Barbara P. Sullivan, Coral Gables