Argumentative Research Rough Draft

ORIGINAL ROUGH DRAFT:

Copy-paste your original rough draft into this space.
FIRST BODY PARAGRAPH:

To begin, prisoners should be able to vote when they are done serving their sentence. They
should be able to vote because it allows them to learn from their mistakes and be given a chance
to have a responsibility. According to "Too Many Ex-Convicts Aren't Able to Vote," from Star
Tribune of Minneapolis-St. Paul, We let ex-convicts marry, reproduce, buy beer, own property
and drive. They don't lose their freedom of religion, their right against self-incrimination or their
right not to have soldiers quartered in their homes in time of war. But in many places, the
assumption is that they can't be trusted to help choose our leaders... If we thought criminals could
never be reformed, we wouldn't let them out of prison in the first place." If ordinary people cant
trust a felon to do a simple task such as voting, they shouldnt be out of prison yet. Meanwhile in
prison, they are being trusted with responsibilities such as cooking and cleaning right after they
committed a crime. Yet, people who oppose believe prisoners should not be given the right to
vote because they already have very bad judgements and being given the opportunity of choosing
the nation's leaders is too much responsibility. According to Another No On Felons (an
editorial from The Washington Post), Even in nearby Massachusetts, no stranger to
progressivism, voters in 2000 supported a constitutional amendment to bar inmates from voting.
The reason is clear: Most people think perpetrators of serious crimes have violated the public
trust and cannot be permitted to help determine the future of the communities they harmed. [For
the time being, the voters' good sense about the possible scenarios - the advent of new
constituencies of prisoners whom politicians court for votes, for instance - still prevails. As does
the sense that most of the time, in most of the country, serious lawbreakers should not help elect
the country's lawmakers. People who oppose, explain that there is a big responsibility lying in a
prisoner's hand which should not be allowed when it comes to irresponsible and unreliable
convicts. Although this may be a big responsibility, it might be able to improve their thought
process by allowing them to make an important decision like this. It can also improve their
decision making when given a responsibility like voting. According to an article from a the
EBSCOHost database, Giving prisoners the vote would aid their rehabilitation, which is
essential if they are to avoid re-offending after being released. Denying prisoners the vote
implies that they are sub-human: this damages their dignity and sense of self-worth, undermining
efforts to help them control their behaviour. Voting encourages prisoners to take an interest in
current events, which will aid their rehab into society. Overall, allowing prisoners to vote gives
them a chance to be responsible and it helps them get back into swing with things outside of
prison.
SECOND BODY PARAGRAPH:
Additionally, prisoners should be provided with homes when they are released from prison. They
should be provided with homes because it keeps them off the streets which could prevent them

from starting up with crime again. According to a statement from Faith Lutze, Without a safe
and stable place to live where they can focus on improving themselves and securing their future,
all of their energy is focused on the immediate need to survive the streets Being homeless
makes it hard to move forward or to find the social support from others necessary to be
successful. Like the woman states, keeping the prisoners of the streets helps the stay out of
trouble and out of gangs. Yet, the opposing side states that prisoners shouldnt be provided with
homes because if prisoners live in the community others wont because it jeopardizes their
safety. According to www.wtsp.com, Where they want to put this transitional housing facility is
a pretty rural area. There are several retired couples, a home with small children and, next to the
property, is a man that makes and sells high-powered rifles I'm afraid they're going to come
over here. I mean, I keep all my stuff locked up, but that doesn't mean they are not going to get
parts that I don't keep locked the safe. The way these people in this area react shows that it is
not easy and unsafe for ex-cons to live in ordinary neighborhoods. This may be true yet, this
could help prisoners get on their feet when they get out and it can also prevent stress when
dealing with finding a home. According to The New York Times, Research shows that housing
and family support, especially during the critical first months after prisoners are released,
increase their chances of success in re-entering society and not returning to crime. But they face
hurdles when trying to rent apartments, advocacy groups say, and for many the preferred or only
option is to return to their former homes or to live with family members. Like this recent study
shows, providing housing for ex-cons renews their ability to interact with the real world in a time
of crisis.
THIRD BODY PARAGRAPH:
Finally, prisoners shouldnt have to show managers a card saying they have been to prison and
why they did when applying for a job. They shouldnt have to do this because it violates their
rights and makes it harder for ex-felons to provide for themselves. According to an article from
the Washington Post, 'Right then and there, it was like the air went out of my tires,' she says. It
was the 'have you ever been convicted of a crime?' box on a job application for a job at
Burlington Coat Factory in a suburb of San Francisco. After six months in prison on an arson
charge, the correct answer for Walker was 'yes' but saying so could essentially disqualify her
for the job. Automatically Im having to make a moral decision Walker says. 'Am I gonna lie?
Or tell the truth?' Walker came clean. She got an interview but at the end, she says, the
interviewer shook her hand and placed her application in a box on the floor, never to be seen
again. Having to tell or show an employer that someone has been to jail makes it even harder to
get a job. They think that having a record makes it unsafe for the customers. On the other hand,
the opposing side believes prisoners should have to show the card because it does in fact give the
criminal a better shot at getting the job. They believe that not telling the employer implies that
the criminal is untrustworthy. According to a database article titles What To Do About Criminal
Records, if you do not tell the truth about your criminal record when you are asked, and
your employer finds out about it at a later date, you may be fired or be seen as unreliable. Not
telling an employer about the conviction shows that they have secrets to hide which might
prevent them from doing their job correctly. Despite the possibility of this, ex-cons should not

have to tell an employer they are criminals because not only does it violate their rights but it also
decreases their chance of getting the job. According to an EBSCOHost database article, Ms.
Pager, the Harvard sociologist, has found in her research that having a criminal record by itself is
often a significant impediment she found men who reported criminal convictions were about
50 percent less likely to receive a callback or a job offer. This states that many studies can prove
that overall, having to explain a criminal record to an employer decreases the ability to get the
job and it violates rights.

ROUGH DRAFT WITH REVISIONS:

Copy-paste your original rough draft into this space. Make all your edits and revisions here.
Highlight your revisions and edits in the following colors:
YELLOW - Formal Style revisions and edits
GREEN - Rubric revisions and edits
PINK - Peer Feedback revisions and edits