"Ban the box" law (14)
Yes except for severe cases.
------ This thread is Archived ------
Friskyone: Definition:
Ban-the-Box Law Limits Criminal Background Inquiries by Federal Contractors Beginning in December 2021. Tuesday, January 7, 2020. The Fair Chance Act prohibits federal contractors from inquiring about a job applicant's criminal background in certain cases in the initial stages of the application process.Jan 7, 2020
Many states have already passed this law.
How do you feel about this law?
Do you think ex-felons should have the right to vote?
Quite a conundrumBan-the-Box Law Limits Criminal Background Inquiries by Federal Contractors Beginning in December 2021. Tuesday, January 7, 2020. The Fair Chance Act prohibits federal contractors from inquiring about a job applicant's criminal background in certain cases in the initial stages of the application process.Jan 7, 2020
Many states have already passed this law.
How do you feel about this law?
Do you think ex-felons should have the right to vote?
Robin Hood , villain or hero - would he be able to get a job with his record
------ This thread is Archived ------
Dedovix: Quite a conundrum
Robin Hood , villain or hero - would he be able to get a job with his record
Maybe, if he wore something different than his tightsRobin Hood , villain or hero - would he be able to get a job with his record
------ This thread is Archived ------
When going through cv´s, I throw half of them in the bin to make sure I don´t employ any unlucky people
------ This thread is Archived ------
Reality check: In the US, of the 2.3 million votes behind bars, less than 16% of them are in for 'violent crimes'.
Why would any State want to limit the ability of 2.3 million persons, many of them a very convenient source of dirt-cheap near-enough-mandatory labour (benefited from by big corporations, not so much 'society') to vote?
And, once you mull the significance of the above over, what is the 'worst' among the violent offenders going to do when it comes to vote?
Even if one forgets that voting is one of the only civil ways granted for a civil populace to defend themselves against State subjugation, voting is called a 'duty' for a reason...
Why would any State want to limit the ability of 2.3 million persons, many of them a very convenient source of dirt-cheap near-enough-mandatory labour (benefited from by big corporations, not so much 'society') to vote?
And, once you mull the significance of the above over, what is the 'worst' among the violent offenders going to do when it comes to vote?
Even if one forgets that voting is one of the only civil ways granted for a civil populace to defend themselves against State subjugation, voting is called a 'duty' for a reason...
------ This thread is Archived ------
Friskyone: Definition:
Ban-the-Box Law Limits Criminal Background Inquiries by Federal Contractors Beginning in December 2021. Tuesday, January 7, 2020. The Fair Chance Act prohibits federal contractors from inquiring about a job applicant's criminal background in certain cases in the initial stages of the application process.Jan 7, 2020
Many states have already passed this law.
How do you feel about this law?
Do you think ex-felons should have the right to vote?
The quick answer is no.Ban-the-Box Law Limits Criminal Background Inquiries by Federal Contractors Beginning in December 2021. Tuesday, January 7, 2020. The Fair Chance Act prohibits federal contractors from inquiring about a job applicant's criminal background in certain cases in the initial stages of the application process.Jan 7, 2020
Many states have already passed this law.
How do you feel about this law?
Do you think ex-felons should have the right to vote?
When someone decides to become a criminal they need to think about what their life will be like after they do the deed. Sometimes a crime happens in a quick minute, other times it is well planned out. A crime is not a mistake. It is a decision.
It's up to them to decide if the crime is worth the price they will pay not only with prison time but what they are giving up in life if they should be released from prison.
Criminals don't deserve the respect the rights the Constitution gives them.
------ This thread is Archived ------
I realize that the last post went somewhat off-topic so let me address the core question in this one.
Only in the context of an imminent exposure to a vulnerable grouping of persons should a prospective employee's background be explored - and such responsibility should be shared by both the State and the prospective employer.
In the event that the employer successfully makes the case that a situation of exposure to the vulnerable is involved in filling the vacancy concerned, the State may run checks on individuals, at charge to the prospective employer, to run the background of the person against the specific exposure scenario listed.
So... a person with a p*dophile-related conviction applying for a teaching position with a potential exposure to younger students would fall foul of this check - while the same person applying for a carer position for an elderly home - not so.
In this way a person who is convicted of such a crime, in the process of being reintegrated, would be advised of what kinds of job positions their conviction may impact success rates for.
This was a very particular scenario, and one could rightfully ask if a convicted thief applying for a position as a storekeeper or any position where a thief's background might or should be highlighted.
Opinion here - but yes it should - but that the depth of such conviction incidents should be variable depending on how many such convictions exist. Perhaps the same should be so for other kinds of offenses - with some being less lenient in search depths than others.
As for this law... from what is mentioned in the original post - I see little evidence of the finesse I've indicated as desirable in the passing of this law... and so it may get messy - even if that shouldn't be an issue with regard to a majority of ex-inmates truly trying to start anew.
Only in the context of an imminent exposure to a vulnerable grouping of persons should a prospective employee's background be explored - and such responsibility should be shared by both the State and the prospective employer.
In the event that the employer successfully makes the case that a situation of exposure to the vulnerable is involved in filling the vacancy concerned, the State may run checks on individuals, at charge to the prospective employer, to run the background of the person against the specific exposure scenario listed.
So... a person with a p*dophile-related conviction applying for a teaching position with a potential exposure to younger students would fall foul of this check - while the same person applying for a carer position for an elderly home - not so.
In this way a person who is convicted of such a crime, in the process of being reintegrated, would be advised of what kinds of job positions their conviction may impact success rates for.
This was a very particular scenario, and one could rightfully ask if a convicted thief applying for a position as a storekeeper or any position where a thief's background might or should be highlighted.
Opinion here - but yes it should - but that the depth of such conviction incidents should be variable depending on how many such convictions exist. Perhaps the same should be so for other kinds of offenses - with some being less lenient in search depths than others.
As for this law... from what is mentioned in the original post - I see little evidence of the finesse I've indicated as desirable in the passing of this law... and so it may get messy - even if that shouldn't be an issue with regard to a majority of ex-inmates truly trying to start anew.
------ This thread is Archived ------
secretagent09: The question is "do ex-felons have the right to vote".
My response is "no". That is not off topic.
I was referring to my post before yours. ;c) Your reply was more on-topic.My response is "no". That is not off topic.
------ This thread is Archived ------
Mercedes_00: Yes except for severe cases.
Yup, like the one's galrads mentioned
------ This thread is Archived ------
Dedovix: Quite a conundrum
Robin Hood , villain or hero - would he be able to get a job with his record
Hmmm...food for thoughtRobin Hood , villain or hero - would he be able to get a job with his record
------ This thread is Archived ------
secretagent09: The quick answer is no.
When someone decides to become a criminal they need to think about what their life will be like after they do the deed. Sometimes a crime happens in a quick minute, other times it is well planned out. A crime is not a mistake. It is a decision.
It's up to them to decide if the crime is worth the price they will pay not only with prison time but what they are giving up in life if they should be released from prison.
Criminals don't deserve the respect the rights the Constitution gives them.
When someone decides to become a criminal they need to think about what their life will be like after they do the deed. Sometimes a crime happens in a quick minute, other times it is well planned out. A crime is not a mistake. It is a decision.
It's up to them to decide if the crime is worth the price they will pay not only with prison time but what they are giving up in life if they should be released from prison.
Criminals don't deserve the respect the rights the Constitution gives them.
So basically what you mean is...if you can't do the time, don't do the crime
and I do agree with that.With that being said, a little off topic here but, there are many convicted innocent prisoners incarcerated and in some circumstances the "criminal" may be hanging with the wrong crowd and could be in the wrong place at the wrong time, being completely unaware that a crime was committed or could even be set-up (a patsy), for example.
------ This thread is Archived ------
Friskyone: So basically what you mean is...if you can't do the time, don't do the crime and I do agree with that.
With that being said, a little off topic here but, there are many convicted innocent prisoners incarcerated and in some circumstances the "criminal" may be hanging with the wrong crowd and could be in the wrong place at the wrong time, being completely unaware that a crime was committed or could even be set-up (a patsy), for example.
With that being said, a little off topic here but, there are many convicted innocent prisoners incarcerated and in some circumstances the "criminal" may be hanging with the wrong crowd and could be in the wrong place at the wrong time, being completely unaware that a crime was committed or could even be set-up (a patsy), for example.
Hanging with the wrong crowd is not an excuse to commit a crime. It is a defense.
If a prisoner was sentenced to be guilty by a jury, but later it is found out that he/she didn't commit the crime then they should be allowed to vote.
------ This thread is Archived ------
A comment on thee right to vote:
Voting is choosing our masters for a given period of time. It is actually a process that is highly anti-democratic because it results in choosing the champion of one of the two teams that have the biggest amouint of money and the biggest media visibility.
So depraving or granting the right to vote to a criminal is of no relevance.
Should criminal records be checked:
I believe that a number of profession should require a criminal record check. Do we want a convicted felon to become a policeman? The answer seems rather obvious. I think though that if someone is legally deemed not suitable for a job because of legal reasons, that person should be made fully aware of it, and that attempting to get such a job should be considered a felony. Thus, a condemned p*dophile would be offcialy notified that he would not have the right to become a teacher, and that attempting to work in a school would lead to further conviction but working as an online teacher could be permitted for example.
Voting is choosing our masters for a given period of time. It is actually a process that is highly anti-democratic because it results in choosing the champion of one of the two teams that have the biggest amouint of money and the biggest media visibility.
So depraving or granting the right to vote to a criminal is of no relevance.
Should criminal records be checked:
I believe that a number of profession should require a criminal record check. Do we want a convicted felon to become a policeman? The answer seems rather obvious. I think though that if someone is legally deemed not suitable for a job because of legal reasons, that person should be made fully aware of it, and that attempting to get such a job should be considered a felony. Thus, a condemned p*dophile would be offcialy notified that he would not have the right to become a teacher, and that attempting to work in a school would lead to further conviction but working as an online teacher could be permitted for example.
------ This thread is Archived ------
This Thread is Archived
This Thread is archived, so you will no longer be able to post to it. Threads get archived automatically when they are older than 3 months.
« Go back to All Threads
« Go back to All Threads
More Threads
Why is this shameful?
s*xual skills
Karen McDougal - Playmate Model will testify in Hush Money Trial
More Proof The GOP is a Criminal Organization
Democrats destroyed America
makeover
Ladies
The GOP Representatives owned by Vladimir Putin
One week of the most outrageous GOP leadership!
Gal / sdarlagg passed away on April 10, 2024
More Threads
Report threads that break rules, are offensive, or contain fighting. Staff may not be aware of the forum abuse, and cannot do anything about it unless you tell us about it. click to report forum abuse »
If one of the comments is offensive, please report the comment instead (there is a link in each comment to report it).
If one of the comments is offensive, please report the comment instead (there is a link in each comment to report it).
Stats for this Thread
763 Views
13 Comments
in Chat Threads
Created: Mar 2020
Last Viewed: 3 hrs ago
Last Commented: Mar 2020
1 Likes
Last Liked: Mar 2020
Related Forums
- Why is this shameful?
- s*xual skills
- Karen McDougal - Playmate Model will testify in Hush Money Trial
- More Proof The GOP is a Criminal Organization
- Democrats destroyed America
- makeover
- Ladies
- The GOP Representatives owned by Vladimir Putin
- One week of the most outrageous GOP leadership!
- Gal / sdarlagg passed away on April 10, 2024
Ban-the-Box Law Limits Criminal Background Inquiries by Federal Contractors Beginning in December 2021. Tuesday, January 7, 2020. The Fair Chance Act prohibits federal contractors from inquiring about a job applicant's criminal background in certain cases in the initial stages of the application process.Jan 7, 2020
Many states have already passed this law.
How do you feel about this law?
Do you think ex-felons should have the right to vote?