Felons No More?

#51
#51
As a program to offer a person a way to turn their life around, I think it's needed. Many immediately return to crime because there is nothing for them. But, I would not be a proponent of immediately expunging their record. They should have to serve a probation period, be it 5 years or whatever, where they have documented appropriate job attendance and performance, and a documented crime free living. They should have to earn the whole nine yards.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Godfatha, Behr, rjd970 and 2 others
#52
#52
Rickyvol77 said:
ok no one said police are NEVER in the wrong, so get out of here with your straw man argument.

There are literally hundreds of thousands of law enforcement officers from every type of back ground possible. Just like any other profession you can name, some are idiots, some are great, some are nice, some are a-holes, and some are criminals. But you are referring to instances which make up about .0001% of all law enforcement-police encounters.
Click to expand...

A straw-man fallacy is implementing an argument that is seemingly the same as the discussion being had, but different enough to easily defeat while attempting to maintain the illusion. You implied (and continue to do so) that cops lying is exceedingly rare, I provided documented cases that show that your singular personal anecdote isn't congruent with reality.

I find it pretty hilarious that you're shoring up an personal anecdote fallacy with fabricated statistics while wrongfully accusing me of using a straw-man.
 
#53
#53
Septic said:
A straw-man fallacy is implementing an argument that is seemingly the same as the discussion being had, but different enough to easily defeat while attempting to maintain the illusion. You implied (and continue to do so) that cops lying is exceedingly rare, I provided documented cases that show that your anecdotes aren't congruent with reality.

I find it pretty hilarious that you're shoring up an personal anecdote fallacy with fabricated statistics while accusing me of using a straw-man.
Click to expand...

So let's say that there were 10,000 incidents last year where police "lied", which you can probably produce actual proof of maybe 200-300 at best. That is .0025% of all law enforcement interactions with citizens, so maybe your definition of rare is different than mine?

How often to people lie to the police in comparison? I hate liars and have never had to lie on a report or on a warrant, if a police officer intentionally lies on either, I agree they should be punished. We aren't in disagreement on this.

Your problem is much like "racism by police", it;s greatly over-exaggerated to excuse criminal behavior
 
#54
#54
TennesseeTopHat said:
How does this prove your point? It’s pure speculation with no facts provided.

What do you guys propose as a better solution? The point of jail is rehabilitation and without the ability to get a real job It’s hard to make money.
Click to expand...
That's a STRONG avatar, TTH. I can only hope it is a picture of you from the 80s.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Septic
#55
#55
Rickyvol77 said:
Here's a good example for you, the hospital i work at does stringent hardcore background checks on it's nurses, doctors, Security officers, CNAs, Pharmacists, etc. and there is hardly any instances of theft, assaults, drug use, etc. from these people.

However, we also contract out our janitors, dietary employees, etc. and they have minimal background checks (except for felonies, they are even hired with just misdemeanor stuff on their record from 10 years ago sometimes). Guess what? Those groups are responsible for the majority of thefts, drug use, domestic situations on the job, and being arrested on our campus by a 10-1 margin.
Click to expand...
And it's probably equal amongst that tier of job. You never get the best and the brightest for the lowest paying jobs with the least amount of training, oversite, and responsibility.

I worked hotel breakfast shift for 2 years. Plenty of illegals with criminal background work hotels, I was the only native English speaker there. My boss a Mexican lady held us, kitchen staff, to a higher standard on the job, and worked herself as hard. No issues from us. The cleaning staff was a different story, boss there hardly cared unless his boss was around. There were problems there. He got fired, a couple of the worst offenders were fired as well. New boss held them to a standard and instances went way down. Same level of employee but if no one sets the standard and lives it you wont see a difference.

Personal responsibility works both ways. Hold to the standard, or dont. Dont pick and choose.

If you dont want them to be criminals dont treat them like criminals well after the fact of justice being served.

At some point you are part of the problem, the first time someone calls you a horse, punch them in the mouth. The second time someone calls you a horse, dont talk to them again. The third time someone calls you a horse? Time to go shopping for a saddle you like.

It cant be all their fault for being a horse if society only treats them like a horse.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NurseGoodVol, tntar heel and Behr
#56
#56
Rickyvol77 said:
So let's say that there were 10,000 incidents last year where police "lied", which you can probably produce actual proof of maybe 200-300 at best. That is .0025% of all law enforcement interactions with citizens, so maybe your definition of rare is different than mine?

How often to people lie to the police in comparison? I hate liars and have never had to lie on a report or on a warrant, if a police officer intentionally lies on either, I agree they should be punished. We aren't in disagreement on this.

Your problem is much like "racism by police", it;s greatly over-exaggerated to excuse criminal behavior
Click to expand...

Putting aside for a second that you are still trying to shoehorn meritless statistics into the conversation with a straight face, as a former policeman - was it your experience that wrongdoers were ALWAYS caught the FIRST time they committed an infraction?

I'mma guess not.

Also, the last bit - accusing me of "over-exaggerating in order to excuse criminal behavior" is a red-herring.
 
#57
#57
For non-violent felons that pass the required training I have no issue here.
 
#58
#58
LouderVol said:
And it's probably equal amongst that tier of job. You never get the best and the brightest for the lowest paying jobs with the least amount of training, oversite, and responsibility.

I worked hotel breakfast shift for 2 years. Plenty of illegals with criminal background work hotels, I was the only native English speaker there. My boss a Mexican lady held us, kitchen staff, to a higher standard on the job, and worked herself as hard. No issues from us. The cleaning staff was a different story, boss there hardly cared unless his boss was around. There were problems there. He got fired, a couple of the worst offenders were fired as well. New boss held them to a standard and instances went way down. Same level of employee but if no one sets the standard and lives it you wont see a difference.

Personal responsibility works both ways. Hold to the standard, or dont. Dont pick and choose.

If you dont want them to be criminals dont treat them like criminals well after the fact of justice being served.

At some point you are part of the problem, the first time someone calls you a horse, punch them in the mouth. The second time someone calls you a horse, dont talk to them again. The third time someone calls you a horse? Time to go shopping for a saddle you like.

It cant be all their fault for being a horse if society only treats them like a horse.
Click to expand...
The problem is you are blaming society, when in reality they made their own choices....I am not saying that people don't make mistakes and can't make a life for themselves or do better at all. But when it comes to the sensitive positions where patient safety, money, drugs, are involved, I am not playing the percentages.
 
#60
#60
Rickyvol77 said:
The problem is you are blaming society, when in reality they made their own choices....I am not saying that people don't make mistakes and can't make a life for themselves or do better at all. But when it comes to the sensitive positions where patient safety, money, drugs, are involved, I am not playing the percentages.
Click to expand...
I have blamed them. They did the crime, and did their time. That's justice. And part of justice is moving on afterwards.

Our society enforces a system that doesnt allow them to move on. Thats not justice, and that's on society.

It's no better than what our FF fought against. You have condemned them for life without giving them a trial or sentencing that calls for life time punishment. Its cruel and unusual.

Why let them out of jail if you arent going to let them do anything that benefits society?
 
#61
#61
LouderVol said:
I have blamed them. They did the crime, and did their time. That's justice. And part of justice is moving on afterwards.

Our society enforces a system that doesnt allow them to move on. Thats not justice, and that's on society.

It's no better than what our FF fought against. You have condemned them for life without giving them a trial or sentencing that calls for life time punishment. Its cruel and unusual.

Why let them out of jail if you arent going to let them do anything that benefits society?
Click to expand...
So not hiring them for sensitive jobs that involve caring for other people, narcotics and money is "cruel and unusual"?

If i am a banker, I am not hiring a thief to be a bank teller
If i am a pharmacist, i am not hiring a drug addict to be a delivery person
If i am a daycare worker, i am not hiring a sex offender to be a teacher

They can work other places, but it's not cruel or unusual to have common sense.
 
#63
#63
Rickyvol77 said:
So not hiring them for sensitive jobs that involve caring for other people, narcotics and money is "cruel and unusual"?

If i am a banker, I am not hiring a thief to be a bank teller
If i am a pharmacist, i am not hiring a drug addict to be a delivery person
If i am a daycare worker, i am not hiring a sex offender to be a teacher

They can work other places, but it's not cruel or unusual to have common sense.
Click to expand...
Again i ask you to define thief/drug addict/sex offender.

If they did their time, came out clean, have been crime free for 10 or more years, have the requisite training and other qualifications how is common sense to define them by what they were 10/20 years ago despite all the evidence to the contrary?

Again either you believe the system works, or you dont. It sounds like you dont think the system works.

I have a number of friends who have had their lives changed negatively because of the outlook you hold. Thankfully they had the support of people who actually believe in justice.
 
#64
#64
Rickyvol77 said:
If you owned a bank would you hire someone to be a teller or auditor if you knew they had a history of stealing?
Click to expand...

With a non-violent offender? Depends on the circumstances. It certainly wouldn’t be an automatic disqualifier.
 
#66
#66
Rickyvol77 said:
If you owned a bank would you hire someone to be a teller or auditor if you knew they had a history of stealing?
Click to expand...

Strawman, unless the people looking to get put on the fire fighting line are serial arsonists.
 
#67
#67
GVF said:
As a program to offer a person a way to turn their life around, I think it's needed. Many immediately return to crime because there is nothing for them. But, I would not be a proponent of immediately expunging their record. They should have to serve a probation period, be it 5 years or whatever, where they have documented appropriate job attendance and performance, and a documented crime free living. They should have to earn the whole nine yards.
Click to expand...

This. Pay your debt to society live with consequences for a bit, but everybody deserves at least the chance to achieve legitimate rehabilitation. If they screw it up with recidivism, that is when sympathy goes away for me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rasputin_Vol
#70
#70
It’s a program that shouldn’t be needed. If you do the crime and do the time it shouldn’t be held against you for the rest of your life. If the crime was so heinous that a person deserves a lifetime of punishment, sentence them to life w/o parole.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Behr and Rasputin_Vol
#71
#71
hog88 said:
It’s a program that shouldn’t be needed. If you do the crime and do the time it shouldn’t be held against you for the rest of your life. If the crime was so heinous that a person deserves a lifetime of punishment, sentence them to life w/o parole.
Click to expand...

Also a valid point. However, there are some that would not be repeats if they had an opportunity after incarceration if they didn't have "felon" on the background check. Maybe the BC could note "violent felon offenses". Either way, we hire quite a few with records. Good tax breaks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rasputin_Vol
#72
#72
Seems like it has potential to be a good program. I say give it a shot with well-qualified inmates and see what happens. Risk-reward is kinda scary, but I think you can find an effective medium with a solid vetting process. Save some lives, get some lives turned around.
 
#73
#73
Chris4Vols22 said:
Seems like it has potential to be a good program. I say give it a shot with well-qualified inmates and see what happens. Risk-reward is kinda scary, but I think you can find an effective medium with a solid vetting process. Save some lives, get some lives turned around.
Click to expand...

Potential anywhere but Cali and NY...Yes. But, they would screw it up from the get go.
 
#75
#75
GVF said:
Also a valid point. However, there are some that would not be repeats if they had an opportunity after incarceration if they didn't have "felon" on the background check. Maybe the BC could note "violent felon offenses". Either way, we hire quite a few with records. Good tax breaks.
Click to expand...

That's what I'm talking about, once you do the time "felon" in no longer on your record.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rasputin_Vol
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top