PDA

View Full Version : Criminals Working At A Job



Bartmanhomer
03 Apr 2016, 13:05
I know that there are some people who got a criminal history but do you think that business companies should hired criminals to work in their companies?

B. de Corbin
03 Apr 2016, 13:39
I know that there are some people who got a criminal history but do you think that business companies should hired criminals to work in their companies?

If they don't, how are those x-convicts going to earn an honest living?

Briton
03 Apr 2016, 13:54
This is exactly what should be done.

If they're entrusted with a job, then they will build the self confidence to stick at it once they get out in order to not commit, whilst also being occupied and having responsibility means they won't go crazy. Being cooped up is just a waste of tax payers money.

Medusa
03 Apr 2016, 14:06
It depends upon the job. Do I want a convicted child molester working at a pre school? No.
Do I want a convicted dui dude working as a bus driver? Niet.
Do I want a convicted grafitti vandal working at my tool store. I'd give them a shot.

MaskedOne
03 Apr 2016, 14:18
If convicts have no legal way to support themselves then they just commit more crimes out of necessity. As not all crimes merit death or indefinite detention, yes convicts need a way to work and earn a living when they get out of prison. Not all jobs necessarily need to be open but options need to exist.

Tylluan Penry
03 Apr 2016, 23:07
'Convicts' got caught, so they were not all that good at what they did. They went to gaol and society says they have paid their price. They HAVE to be reintegrated back into society whenever possible, although obviously not put into positions where they will be tempted to commit the same crime, although there are plenty of examples of poachers turned gamekeepers who have actually helped the police in later life because they know all the loopholes.

What I want to know is - How about all the people engaged in criminal activity who haven't got caught yet?
Cos they are everywhere. And we don't (usually) know this. ;)

DanieMarie
04 Apr 2016, 00:46
If convicts have no legal way to support themselves then they just commit more crimes out of necessity. As not all crimes merit death or indefinite detention, yes convicts need a way to work and earn a living when they get out of prison. Not all jobs necessarily need to be open but options need to exist.

This.

Almost everyone deserves a second chance. I'm all in favour of justice systems that treat prisons as rehabilitation programs, not punishment programs. Part of rehabilitation is learning how to be a productive member of society.

I also agree with Tylluan that sometimes, convicts can be valuable in their former areas of crime. Along with her example, a lot of people who were convicted of cyber crimes or fraud have become valuable additions to cyber crimes and fraud units. They tend to know those areas well and know how people operate within them.

B. de Corbin
04 Apr 2016, 01:49
All the research, all the evidence points to the same end. To reduce crime, poverty, etc., punishment does not work. Punishment, as punishment, perpetuates the problem.

People who are stuck in generational cycles need the opportunity to end that cycle.

I know how irritating this is to people like me who struggled through life, working through their education, or who are paying off huge student debt - then see people "rewarded" for committing a crime with what we sacrificed for.

Yes, we got the stinky end of the stick, but the solution to that injustice isn't more injustice.

We really need to start making societal decisions based on research, not revenge. We've tried revenge, and it just hasn't worked.

Bartmanhomer
04 Apr 2016, 04:23
I remain neutral on this topic. There some criminals who can work on a job and there are some criminals who can't work because of their serious crimes that they committed.

DanieMarie
04 Apr 2016, 04:38
The other thing is that all of us make mistakes at some point. Most of us don't make mistakes that would involve breaking the law or going to jail, but we still make them. Should major mistakes ruin our lives? Shouldn't we be given the chance to learn from them and move on to a new chapter in our lives?

I don't know about you guys, but I've broken the law before. I've never done anything that would land me in jail, but I did some things that would give me some pretty hefty fines in my country (and a couple that would have landed me prison sentences in the US, although not here or in Canada). They're not things I'd do now. People often do stupid things when they're younger. Even if they go further than I ever did, I don't think that should ruin the rest of their lives.

MaskedOne
04 Apr 2016, 05:43
All the research, all the evidence points to the same end. To reduce crime, poverty, etc., punishment does not work. Punishment, as punishment, perpetuates the problem.

People who are stuck in generational cycles need the opportunity to end that cycle.

I know how irritating this is to people like me who struggled through life, working through their education, or who are paying off huge student debt - then see people "rewarded" for committing a crime with what we sacrificed for.

Yes, we got the stinky end of the stick, but the solution to that injustice isn't more injustice.

We really need to start making societal decisions based on research, not revenge. We've tried revenge, and it just hasn't worked.

The secondary headache here is that distrust can provide as much of a hurdle as vengeance. It's one thing to acknowledge that released criminals need employment somewhere. It's another to trust a convicted thief with access to your company's funds and equipment.

B. de Corbin
04 Apr 2016, 06:00
The secondary headache here is that distrust can provide as much of a hurdle as vengeance. It's one thing to acknowledge that released criminals need employment somewhere. It's another to trust a convicted thief with access to your company's funds and equipment.

Of course - that's why you have to watch (as has been pointed out) what x-con was incarcerated for what, and what job they are being offered. Also, a position of trust needs to be earned, and that might take years, depending on the degree of trust, and the particular crime.

I agree with what has been said - after prison, all is not forgotten. But they need a chance of some kind. Without the possibility of a paying job, the choices come down to A) just kill them, B) keep them permanently incarcerated, C) let them starve, D) keep them on the permanent dole, E) force them to return to crime, F) expect them to be supported by family, friends or charity.

Maybe there is another choice I've missed...

Tylluan Penry
04 Apr 2016, 07:49
Personally I would prefer to see criminals working at a job rather than working at a crime. ;)

thalassa
04 Apr 2016, 08:12
People often do stupid things when they're younger.

Also when they are desperate. And when they don't know any better.



'Convicts' got caught, so they were not all that good at what they did. They went to gaol and society says they have paid their price.

On one hand, yes...but on the other hand, at least in the US, the "justice" system is highly biased against minorities, particularly African Americans. Convicts here are mostly people that were too poor to get a decent lawyer or people of color, or both.

ThePaganMafia
04 Apr 2016, 08:23
Crime(excluding white collar) is a symptom of economic conditions. You can't keep wages low, outsource industry, make college unattainable, heavily police drugs, and then say the prison system is the solution. That is counter-intuitive.

I was watching a documentary recently about a 14 year who was serving life in Florida for Armed Robbery. No one was hurt in the crime. Due to a Supreme Court ruling that said minors can't be sentenced to life for non-homicides he was up for re-sentencing.

While in prison he took advantage of all the educational programs available to him and was a model prisoner. He had served 12 years and was 26 at his re-sentencing. They paraded the victims in there to cry about how he ahould never be realeased(extremely biased parties influencing sentencing makes perfect sense, doesnt it?) The Judge said, "I do believe you have been rehabilitatedbut that is not enough for this Court." And he was sentenced to 40 years.

It was then that I jumped off of my couch and started yelling at the television, "WTF IS THE POINT OF PRISON THEN YOU $&#%@$&#%@%&%#?"

So, the Justice system serves as a tool of oppression and the deck is heavily stacked against those in poverty. With all this injustice I think a job for someone is the least we can do.

DanieMarie
04 Apr 2016, 09:04
Also when they are desperate. And when they don't know any better.




On one hand, yes...but on the other hand, at least in the US, the "justice" system is highly biased against minorities, particularly African Americans. Convicts here are mostly people that were too poor to get a decent lawyer or people of color, or both.

Let's not forget that some places in the US are basically returning to debtor's prison and putting people in jail for unpaid parking fines and other misdemeanours, which build up over time thanks to privatized collections.

DragonsFriend
04 Apr 2016, 09:11
Let's not forget that some places in the US are basically returning to debtor's prison and putting people in jail for unpaid parking fines and other misdemeanours, which build up over time thanks to privatized collections.

Could you provide evidence to back this up?

B. de Corbin
04 Apr 2016, 09:17
Let's not forget that some places in the US are basically returning to debtor's prison and putting people in jail for unpaid parking fines and other misdemeanours, which build up over time thanks to privatized collections.

...and conficating cash & goods from people who have not even been accused of comitting a crime, other than "carrying cash while black."

- - - Updated - - -


Could you provide evidence to back this up?

Feds discouraging states from jailing criminal defendants who fail to pay fines or fees (http://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2016-03-14/justice-dept-states-shouldnt-jail-over-fine-nonpayment)


WASHINGTON (AP) The Justice Department is discouraging state court systems from jailing poor defendants who fail to pay fines or fees, warning against practices that it says run afoul of the Constitution and erode community trust.

DanieMarie
04 Apr 2016, 09:22
http://www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2015/02/09/384968360/jail-time-for-unpaid-court-fines-and-fees-can-create-cycle-of-poverty
http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2015/10/6/washington-county-jails-people-who-cant-pay-court-fines-aclu-says.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0UjpmT5noto (Last Week Tonight does a surprising amount of research for its segments).
Etc, etc

- - - Updated - - -


...and conficating cash & goods from people who have not even been accused of comitting a crime, other than "carrying cash while black."



There's that too. Sometimes it seems like taxes aren't really low in the US; they're just shifted to the poor in other ways.

Briton
04 Apr 2016, 10:50
I remain neutral on this topic. There some criminals who can work on a job and there are some criminals who can't work because of their serious crimes that they committed.

What crimes make a person unable to work?

monsno_leedra
04 Apr 2016, 11:16
Just me being my normal self and coming from left field but the idea of criminals working at a job here seems to be entirely focused upon a released criminal. Yet what about those still in jail / prison? There used to be quite a few prison / jail systems that employed work programs both within the prison itself or within certain parts of the civilian community. Even things such as chain gangs that while not what we'd think of as a job today did under some conditions pay the criminal a minimum or lessor wage but made them worked while in jail.

It seems today the jail systems serve but one purpose, to separate them from society and in many ways leave them unemployed. Religion, education, set meals, etc doesn't really seem like punishment or rehabilitation to many. Even less who see it as any form of gainful payment towards their expenses to house, feed, cloth, etc the prisoners.

B. de Corbin
04 Apr 2016, 12:16
One of the problems with inmates working while in prison is that it can easily become a form of de facto slavery - that's what was going on with the chain gangs.

Such programs can be good, especially when they teach usable job skills, but they require more over site than is commonly given. This becomes an uber problem when prisons are privatized.

IMHO - there are some things that should NOT be privatized, especially: prisons, police, the military, and schools. Unfortunately, all of these things are being privatized.

thalassa
04 Apr 2016, 16:38
One of the problems with inmates working while in prison is that it can easily become a form of de facto slavery - that's what was going on with the chain gangs.



Prisons are still wildly guilty of this...maybe not the chain gang part, but the in-all-but-name slave labor, yes. And considering the way our system is racially biased and skewed against the poor, we should just call it what it is.

Medusa
04 Apr 2016, 21:36
A lot of you must not have criminals the way LA has criminals. I think some of you need some qualifiers for me to believe what you are saying.

Just saying.

B. de Corbin
05 Apr 2016, 01:13
A lot of you must not have criminals the way LA has criminals. I think some of you need some qualifiers for me to believe what you are saying.

Just saying.

Specificly, which parts?

anunitu
05 Apr 2016, 03:13
Maybe street hustlers,con artists,three card Monty dudes....pick pockets..Hard gang types..Thug life types,hustlers,pimps,car thieves,B&E types,on and on in the city..."hot down,summer in the city,back of my neck getting dirt and gritty."


https://youtu.be/m648v4s5sFc

Briton
05 Apr 2016, 03:17
Whether or not the UK has criminals like LA has criminals, I don't know (The Yorkshire Ripper; Ian Brady; Rosemary West, Charles Bronson, The Suffolk Strangler, Robert Maudsley), but just because one individual place has "a bit of a record" for its criminals doesn't mean the majority of criminals elsewhere in other countries can't be helped.

DanieMarie
05 Apr 2016, 06:15
Whether or not the UK has criminals like LA has criminals, I don't know (The Yorkshire Ripper; Ian Brady; Rosemary West, Charles Bronson, The Suffolk Strangler, Robert Maudsley), but just because one individual place has "a bit of a record" for its criminals doesn't mean the majority of criminals elsewhere in other countries can't be helped.

Also, just because somewhere has lower street crime doesn't mean it doesn't have a lot of other crime. For example, white collar crime is quite rampant in some parts of the developed world.

Honestly, I think white collar criminals are more likely to be beyond help than street criminals, simply because most of them do it out of a sense of entitlement or because they have corrupt morals. But that still doesn't mean they shouldn't be given the chance at all.

Fenrir
05 Apr 2016, 08:30
Prisons are still wildly guilty of this...maybe not the chain gang part, but the in-all-but-name slave labor, yes. And considering the way our system is racially biased and skewed against the poor, we should just call it what it is.
Our systems aren't racially biased. Our society is. Has been since Reconstruction. Obviously before too but that was when slavery was OK and Jesus hated the blacks.

thalassa
05 Apr 2016, 10:26
Our systems aren't racially biased. Our society is.

Considering that the latter feeds the former and that the former reinforces the latter, its all one and the same.

Fenrir
05 Apr 2016, 10:58
Considering that the latter feeds the former and that the former reinforces the latter, its all one and the same.
Why I personally support its destruction

Briton
05 Apr 2016, 12:25
Why I personally support its destruction

Society or the justice system?

I'll be honest a part of me wants to see everything scrapped so we can try again.

A part of me is a dystopian masochist.

B. de Corbin
05 Apr 2016, 12:32
I'll be honest a part of me wants to see everything scrapped so we can try again.

Everything is in place to make things work, but people aren't using it. Until people actually DO start using it, tearing everything down will just recreate the problem - at the expense of much unhappiness for everybody.

Briton
05 Apr 2016, 12:39
Everything is in place to make things work, but people aren't using it. Until people actually DO start using it, tearing everything down will just recreate the problem - at the expense of much unhappiness for everybody.

Oh I know that, full well. But the ones who will lose the most are the ones I have least sympathy for, such as millionaire world leaders.

B. de Corbin
05 Apr 2016, 12:43
Oh I know that, full well. But the ones who will lose the most are the ones I have least sympathy for, such as millionaire world leaders.

You mean the people with private armies, and secure compounds or private, protected islands?

LOL

DanieMarie
05 Apr 2016, 13:06
Oh I know that, full well. But the ones who will lose the most are the ones I have least sympathy for, such as millionaire world leaders.

In a system where a good chunk of the people are apathetic, that's not exactly true. This wouldn't be a socialist revolution. It would be a situation where opportunists could easily take power under the noses of everyone else, and that's very dangerous.

Briton
05 Apr 2016, 13:28
In a system where a good chunk of the people are apathetic, that's not exactly true. This wouldn't be a socialist revolution. It would be a situation where opportunists could easily take power under the noses of everyone else, and that's very dangerous.

Hence me describing it as masochistic!

- - - Updated - - -


You mean the people with private armies, and secure compounds or private, protected islands?

LOL

In a world where paper money has no value, who are they going to hire? And why would these "private armies" be willing to work for nothing? It would be genuine anarchy.

B. de Corbin
05 Apr 2016, 15:06
In a world where paper money has no value, who are they going to hire? And why would these "private armies" be willing to work for nothing? It would be genuine anarchy.

Histoicaly, when rule of law breaks down, those who have the fortresses, military and equipment become warlords.

How are their soldiers paid? The same way mercenaries are always paid - with the "right" to loot, rape, take slaves, engage in senseless acts of violence... The kinds of things that people who choose to kill for a living enjoy doing.