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.
Well that is a different topic. And one I would probably agree with.
None the less, the law is just that. Its well known and if you violate it and are caught, there are consequences. All actions as well as inactions have consequences.
Truth be told, I would think plenty of places would be more than willing to ignore an array of trangressions that come under drug violations.
As with Sam, you and I can find common ground here as well. I agree with it. Everything has consequences. However; I don't believe in continuing to beat someone down over and over. At some point you have to say they did their time, and have paid their debt to society. Again, this is for non-violent offenders, and not violent offenders or scam artists like Bernie Madoff. I hope that guy truly rots in HELL!
As with Sam, you and I can find common ground here as well. I agree with it. Everything has consequences. However; I don't believe in continuing to beat someone down over and over. At some point you have to say they did their time, and have paid their debt to society. Again, this is for non-violent offenders, and not violent offenders or scam artists like Bernie Madoff. I hope that guy truly rots in HELL!
Hey man, if a guy murders someone, does his time, gains release, and then applies for a job, its up to the employer to decide whether he is fit to work there or not.
If they decide to hire him despite his past, that is fine with me. I would even applaud them (and stash a stun gun in my desk. I am averse to government mandating it, especially under the much maligned term, "discrimination."
I still wonder though. If a job is so important to a criminal's rehab, why the hell did the become a criminal in the first place?
Location: Currently I physically reside on the 3rd planet from the sun
2,220 posts, read 1,878,859 times
Reputation: 886
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChocLot
I think it's a terrible shame that many ex-convicts are not given a full chance to rehabilitate once they reenter society. They've paid their debt; they have a right to earn a living. Otherwise, you risk them falling back into the unsavory things they were doing to land in jail.
Trying to imagine the circumstances in which a murderer would be allowed to reenter society. Are we talking manslaughter? Wouldn't necessarily have a problem working with a convicted rapist. I could just as easily get raped by a stranger on the street.
I'm with you on this one ChocLot.
Especially with the active criminalization of US Citizens through such fiascos as Family Courts and the War on Drugs.
You only hire perfect people like yourself, I imagine.
We are a spiteful society. We send people off to prison for decades with no thought about rehabilitation, just punishment. And when they're done, the punishment continues for now that they've been in jail, they should be shunned forever. Or, like you do, they should not be given a chance at a decent job. Without forgiveness, there is no hope. Without hope, there will be desperation. With desperation, there will be crime. Can we not see how the condition is a vicious cycle?
Face it, in America we treat each other like crap. Everybody, even those who haven't committed a crime. Distrust rules the day. Pee in this cup so I can test your bodily fluids and maybe, just maybe, I'll hire you.
Bleeding hearts will for the most part save this country from itself. And the heartless empty vessels now masquerading as human beings will die out like the dinosaurs.
1. BLEEDING HEART LIBERALS must hire felony applicants over non crime committing Americans.
2. San Francisco must provide sanctuary for all homeless and Illegal Aliens who come there.
3. Bleeding Heart Liberals (left wing loons), must provide their children to breed with said criminals/illegals
I don't believe anyone thinks the unemployed or those with poor credit should be discriminated against either.
~ButterBrownBiscuit~
I do. Most employers who screen for credit are screening for bankruptcies.
I think it is one way to screen for the character of their employees. Also for the long term unemployed the concern is a skill deficit and frankly coming across desperate on an interview.
Still at the end of the day I don't think it's the place of the government to dictate who businesses hire. The protected class status should be confined to an inherent charecteristic of a group of people not based on behaviors.
The sad part is that most employers in the US would rather hire illegal aliens than ex-cons who are US citizens or, even worse, people with bad credit scores.
I think it's a terrible shame that many ex-convicts are not given a full chance to rehabilitate once they reenter society. They've paid their debt; they have a right to earn a living. Otherwise, you risk them falling back into the unsavory things they were doing to land in jail.
Trying to imagine the circumstances in which a murderer would be allowed to reenter society. Are we talking manslaughter? Wouldn't necessarily have a problem working with a convicted rapist. I could just as easily get raped by a stranger on the street.
Americans are an extremely vindictive people, there is a reason why the
Recidivism rate is what it is, and this is it.I have felony for a DUI, never had
An accident, the first DUI I lost my medical license which just aggravated a
Bad situation and now 10 years later I'm looking for a liver donor, I couldn't
Get a license to be a barber today though I have been sober a good while.
At what point do they realize their methods do not work?, they need to
Incentivize positive change for people in bad circumstances.
Firstly, I would propose you ceasing to imply that they are some sort of victim. They made their (bad) choices and bad choices have consequences, many of which last a lifetime. Those of us who have refrained from robbing and murdering are the bad people?
Secondly, if one chooses not to hire an ex-con, it strikes me as prudent, not discrimination. I suspect most violent ex-cons are capable of little more than pushing a mail cart around my office. We can find plenty of law-abiding people to do that.
Finally, I would propose that people embrace education rather than crime as a means to advance. Simplistic? I think not. How many violent felons can honestly say their crime payed off? When does society ascend the learning curve? What is wrong with a culture that values spending years in jail rather than years ina classroom?
You want to hire a felon, go right ahead. I suspect others have and may have done well by it.
There are less and less violent felons, more and more non-violent, your attitude has led us to where we are today, prison expenditures are right behind Medicare!, maybe that's the only language you understand!
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.
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.
. I am averse to government mandating it, especially under the much maligned term, "discrimination."
