Obama plans to be engaged in urban affairs/"White House Office on Urban Policy" (Chicago: schools, colleges)

[PokerPlayer1]

Originally Posted by Attrill

As has been noted in many other threads the increased shootings in Chicago over the last year have been very localized, and there is a direct correlation to communities that have lost Cease Fire funding.

Correlation does not imply causation

[via chicago]

Originally Posted by PokerPlayer1

Correlation does not imply causation

No it dosen't. But if you would look into the program itself and read first hand accounts of deadly gang violence that was diverted as a direct result of the program's intervention, you would realize your point really dosen't matter.

[Lookout Kid]

Originally Posted by PokerPlayer1

Let's face it. "Urban policy" is code for impoverished, inner-city black people, with maybe a few tangential issues (like infrastructure) that apply to everyone.

Of all the problems that face that particular demographic, the most unfair and oppressive is that of offender reentry. The fact that our society has gotten to the point where we won't let a person reform as a matter of institutional policy- even if they genuinely want to- is just disgusting. It is nearly impossible for ex-offenders to find any sort of meaningful employment, and people wonder why the recidivism rate is what it is?
We incarcerate people without any efforts towards rehabilitation, release them back into society without any viable skills and then tell them that even if they want to work, we aren't going to let them...

It's the first issue that Obama should address. We need a Federal law that mandates expungement of an array of offenses after a certain period of time, on both the state and Federal level. As things stand, there are a number of states where expungement is impossible. People convicted in Federal court- even of relatively menial offenses or offenses that occurred when they were very young- have NO recourse for expungement. Their only avenue for a bit of relief is the 1-10,000 shot of a presidential pardon, but even then, that doesn't seal their record.

Don't read me wrong here... There are offenses that are so grave that there is no forgiveness, even if the offender earns release. With that said, the vast amount of things our society criminalizes are morally neutral and shouldn't preclude someone from being able to work. I just cannot stand that a 19 year old kid who sells some pot, it sentenced to probation, is released from probation, goes to college and wants to be an account but we won't let him... Our society errs so gravely here and is so morally off base on this issue it makes me want to puke.

I hear what you're saying, but what about the right of employers to know that they're not hiring ex-cons? There are two sides to that coin.

[Attrill]

Originally Posted by PokerPlayer1

Correlation does not imply causation

Granted, but it is one of the first steps in determining causation. As Via noted, there is a lot of other evidence that backs up the success of this program.

[PokerPlayer1]

Originally Posted by Lookout Kid

I hear what you're saying, but what about the right of employers to know that they're not hiring ex-cons? There are two sides to that coin.

The United States incarcerates more people per capita than any other nation on earth.... Let me repeat that- The United States- the "land of the free"- has a higher percentage of its population in prison than Iraq, Iran, Russia, China, etc, etc, etc, etc...

For many (if not most) offenses, we just cannot allow a mindless label like "ex con" to continue to be the last institutionally codified form of discrimination left in the US. The rest of the civilized world agrees with me; virtually every country on earth has some sort of process or procedure to expunge or "render spent" a crime, after a certain period of crime free living. It makes sense. It just isn't fair or just to make someone unemployable for the rest of their lives, just because they made one single mistake.

I will reiterate- there are some predatory type offenses that are beyond the pale and maybe, records of those offenses should be 'accessible' for a long, long time- if not indefinitely. Murders, rapes, harming children, etc, etc... With that said, no, I don't think some kid who sold some pot at 23 or an idiot who stole a car at 19 should be unable to move on with his life and obtain decent employment at 34.

The problem is, the way things are presently structured and in the age of $9.95 background checks, it is IMPOSSIBLE for someone to rehabilitate and move beyond their past. There is a grave philosophical flaw here, and in my opinion, it needs to be repaired; fast. There are a lot of people out there who made mistakes, paid their debt and desperately want to reenter society yet we won't let them back in as working, productive members, while we rue and gnash our teeth over why the crime/recidivism rate is so high.

[PokerPlayer1]

Originally Posted by Lubin

In America we believe in liberty and freedom. Therefore, an employer should be able to hire who he/she wants. Unfortunately, we have seen these freedoms eroded with all kinds of marxist and reverse-racist affirm-action extortions, etc.

It isn't Marxism. If we are a country that believes in liberty and freedom, then we cannot say "one strike and you're out". That's hypocritical as hell. If you understood more about this issue and realized that people who get caught up in the justice system aren't rampaging demons but more often than not, are ordinary folks in marginal circumstances who made simple lapses in judgment, you might be able to opine philosophical on this issue. As someone who operates on dogma alone (as you clearly do, evidenced by the content of your post), it's pointless to even discuss this with you.

If private industry exercises its rights to hire who they want, are you suggesting that the government then should hire the ex-felons? when we have unemployment and competent workers everywhere who are better employees with better resumes?

The government already does. That one cannot obtain government employment after an offense is a myth.

An ex-felon needs to be helped by his own family. Not the government.
But that's an entire new can of worms -- the breakdown of the family in urban neighborhoods.

Ahhhh yes, 'libertarian theory'. It all works so great in theory, but sadly, those notions are a complete dogs ass in practice. Unfortunately, the real world doesn't exist 'in theory'. With tens of millions of people who are currently subject to complete marginalization usually for offenses that we all can agree don't warrant such a consequence (well, anyone who is reasonable... "Law and order" dogmatists excluded, of course), it's up to society to decide if selling pot at 18 years old should allow anyone in society to discriminate against you at 38.

Right now, most people in society say no, that's very unfair, but they aren't motivated enough to speak up about it since the ex-offender spectrum tends to be limited to lower income communities.

[afonega1]

Originally Posted by Lubin

Quite a condemnation on multi-culturalism. Diversity is not a strength.



Doesn't stop the illegals. They seem to manage in America. I wonder if there will be any background checks done with the Amnesty? You could take your line of questioning to Luis Gutierrez, he might have some good ideas. He works daily with people who are trying skirt and/or change US laws.

America is America because of its Diversity.Don't try to only see the good without the bad.The most Diverse countries in the world are mostly diverse.Greece and Rome were diverse as well as Egypt and Nubia.Its not easy but its worth it when its right.

[PokerPlayer1]

Originally Posted by Lubin

Quite a condemnation on multi-culturalism. Diversity is not a strength.

Believe it or not, I'm not a 'bleding heart' type guy. I do have a very staunch view of fairness and I do understand that people make mistakes, thus my position on this issue, but I'm sure you and I agree on more than you would suspect.

Doesn't stop the illegals. They seem to manage in America. I wonder if there will be any background checks done with the Amnesty? You could take your line of questioning to Luis Gutierrez, he might have some good ideas. He works daily with people who are trying skirt and/or change US laws.

Whooooooooooah, back up that tangent.
"Illegals" are existing on the margins of society, no different than native born citizens who genuinely want to work. I believe that a lot of the jobs that might be suitable for a lot of reentering offenders are presently occupied by illegals... That's a totally different discussion.

[Avengerfire]

Originally Posted by afonega1

...Greece and Rome were diverse as well as Egypt and Nubia.Its not easy but its worth it when its right.

The growing diversity of all those empires actually helped greatly in bringing them down.

I am not a racist; but bringing up those examples does not bring strength to your argument.

[afonega1]

Originally Posted by Avengerfire

The growing diversity of all those empires actually helped greatly in bringing them down.

I am not a racist; but bringing up those examples does not bring strength to your argument.

Just because you disagree with me does not make you a racist.I understand why you would make that statement.I do not agree with it however.Those civilizations spread themselves so much that they began to loose sight of what they stood for,that what cause them their power.Eventually conquering and learning making the captured assimilate began to turn into just a power trip without a vision.At the height of all those Ancient powers ,they had MADE those who they conquered follow there religion and custom,while accepting some elements by incorporating and blending with their own.
China ,Japan while powerful never reached that type of global power that say Rome,later France ,Britain.or Germany.Those empires are still here still thriving today.