Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-03-2011, 02:54 PM
 
Location: State of Being
35,879 posts, read 77,448,814 times
Reputation: 22752

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by rhawkins74 View Post
So the point is because the people passed the background check and committed heinous crimes, showing that background checks don't prevent, it helps the next employer how?
That is not what I said at all, lol.

Even if a person's current employer didn't do a background check, the felon's next employer can check - and if they do - they will catch the employee's felony.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-03-2011, 02:56 PM
 
Location: State of Being
35,879 posts, read 77,448,814 times
Reputation: 22752
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rggr View Post
I can't imagine that some of you actually believe some of the things posted. It is true, that a criminal check does not protect you against someone that hasn't been arrested yet or has had something dropped from a record. However, it can protect you from every one of the millions that do have criminal records. Why would you not take any precaution possible, particularly since the same people arguing against the checks would want to be able to sue a company if an employee committed a crime against them?
Excellent points.

One of our schools screwed up here several years ago, and altho it was never explained, a janitor was hired who was on the sexual predator registry! And sure enuff, an incident occurred and all hell broke loose . . . lawsuits, recriminations, etc.

You are so correct - one of the reasons for doing background checks is to protect the employer from liability issues.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-03-2011, 03:09 PM
 
Location: Central, IL
3,382 posts, read 4,078,854 times
Reputation: 1379
Quote:
Originally Posted by anifani821 View Post
That is not what I said at all, lol.

Even if a person's current employer didn't do a background check, the felon's next employer can check - and if they do - they will catch the employee's felony.
actually if you look what you wrote in response to what I said, it is exactly what you said.

You may not have meant that, or maybe you didnt fully read what I had wrote!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-03-2011, 03:17 PM
 
1,770 posts, read 2,896,342 times
Reputation: 1174
I am SO confused these days (Honest, no sarcasm)
I do pride myself as being socially liberal and like to think of myself as progressive.

With that being said:

I don't understand why people get bashed if a comment is made about minorities being criminals. THEN, you have things like this occur. It's OK to say that most criminals happen to be minorities, only when it makes them look like the victim here??

I really, really, don't understand this kind of thinking

How about if people don't commit crime, they won't have to worry about this stuff? People commit crime by choice. Yeah I know someone will say WAAAH BUT WAT IF SOME MAN STEAL BREAD FOR FAMILY N GET CAUGHT?!.. Well, it's still a crime and let's be honest here: MOST of these criminals are drug dealers, killers, rapists, robbers, etc.

I'm sure very few would fall into the "stole bread for hungry family" statisitc, but I'm sure I'll be told I'm being ignorant.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-03-2011, 03:22 PM
 
Location: Unperson Everyman Land
38,647 posts, read 26,363,905 times
Reputation: 12648
Quote:
Originally Posted by Napoleon357 View Post
As a felony free black person,I have no problem with criminal checks and drug tests. Credit checks,not so much...

As a felony free white person, I agree. Under certain circumstances I understand why they might want to look into my criminal record. If I have a felony conviction for stealing or possession of crack, they would be unwise to make me responsible for cash. If I have a felony conviction for stabbing someone, they should not hire me as a sushi chef or butcher. However, if they are hiring me to do a job that doesn't involve a company credit card or future investment in the business, my credit rating shouldn't matter and is really none of their business. Furthermore, using a credit score to determine a person's fitness as an employee would tend to discriminate against the poor, aged, military veterans, singles, divorced and disabled since no one with a low income has good credit.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-03-2011, 03:23 PM
 
13,648 posts, read 20,767,629 times
Reputation: 7650
Quote:
Originally Posted by h0tmess View Post
I am SO confused these days (Honest, no sarcasm)
I do pride myself as being socially liberal and like to think of myself as progressive.

With that being said:

I don't understand why people get bashed if a comment is made about minorities being criminals. THEN, you have things like this occur. It's OK to say that most criminals happen to be minorities, only when it makes them look like the victim here??

I really, really, don't understand this kind of thinking

How about if people don't commit crime, they won't have to worry about this stuff? People commit crime by choice. Yeah I know someone will say WAAAH BUT WAT IF SOME MAN STEAL BREAD FOR FAMILY N GET CAUGHT?!.. Well, it's still a crime and let's be honest here: MOST of these criminals are drug dealers, killers, rapists, robbers, etc.

I'm sure very few would fall into the "stole bread for hungry family" statisitc, but I'm sure I'll be told I'm being ignorant.
No, you are being honest. I have yet to see the felon that is starving- starving as those in Somalia are starving.

Despite all the howls to the contrary, we do have a social welfare state in this country.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-03-2011, 03:27 PM
 
Location: bold new city of the south
5,821 posts, read 5,301,422 times
Reputation: 7118
Default One study revealed that upwards of 70% of crimes are committed by 30% of the offenders.

Most crimes are commited by repeat offenders.

Background checks reveal repeat offenders.

Felony Repeat Offender Team - State Attorney's Office (http://sa18.state.fl.us/prosecute/felrot.htm - broken link)

56% OF VIOLENT FELONS ARE REPEAT OFFENDERS | Organized Crime Digest | Find Articles at BNET

http://www.phillyfuture.org/node/4176 (broken link)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-03-2011, 03:28 PM
 
10,854 posts, read 9,297,399 times
Reputation: 3122
Quote:
Originally Posted by tinman01 View Post
No criminal checks disqualify criminals from the process. It has nothing to do with race or sex.
Actually in some cases a criminal background check will disqualify anybody who has ever been arrested.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-03-2011, 03:32 PM
 
10,854 posts, read 9,297,399 times
Reputation: 3122
Quote:
Originally Posted by C.C View Post
An employee doesn't have to handle money to be a financial liability. A dishonest employee can be complicit in shoplifting, credit card theft, even bogus personal injury lawsuits...
A guess you missed "etc." and I'm not disagreeing with you.

But let me ask you this. If somebody got arrested and convicted of marijuana possession does that make that person a shoplifter, credit card thief, or personal injury scam artist?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-03-2011, 03:42 PM
C.C
 
2,235 posts, read 2,362,140 times
Reputation: 461
Quote:
Originally Posted by JazzyTallGuy View Post
A guess you missed "etc." and I'm not disagreeing with you.

But let me ask you this. If somebody got arrested and convicted of marijuana possession does that make that person a shoplifter, credit card thief, or personal injury scam artist?
Not at all, but since you mention it there could be other factors than honesty involved. If I knowingly hire a drug offender, what's my liability if that employee gets high and injures someone while working for me?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:56 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top