1 out of 4 Americans have a criminal record!

[freebird5825]

Quote:

Originally Posted by NW-Bound I'd like to hear about the immoral choices... That sounds more interesting. Er, never mind. Andy surely wants to keep this forum PG-13, and it got awfully close to R-rated a few times.

Gauntlet dropped...wooooo hooooooo

Stay tuned...

[hakuna matata]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bestwifeever DH had a background check done for a volunteer position and was called in to explain how he had been in prison for murder and armed robbery and was currently dead. SS numbers mixed up, similar name. I hope.

You are the Best wife ever aren't you. I hope my wife would stand by me too Alas I am one of the 75% that is clear and clean so I am good.

See instead of looking it as 25% having a criminal record, ya just gotta flip it around and it sounds a lot better. Over 75% of American DON'T have a criminal record. Feel better?

[FIREd]

Quote:

Originally Posted by M Paquette Yeah, I think we criminalize too damn many people. It's stupid, expensive, but looks really good in that "Tough on Crime!" re-election literature.

Sometimes, I scare myself by watching cop shows on TV. I gotta tell you, it looks so darn easy to end up with a criminal record in this country. So much of what constitutes a crime seems based on judgment calls rather than hard evidence. When does my driving become reckless? When does my conduct become disorderly?

Since a simple misdemeanor could get me deported, I ain't playing with the long arm of the law.

[ziggy29]

There's a difference between habitual "career" stupid/criminal behavior and a one-and-done stupid non-violent mistake committed in one's youth. IMO, it really sucks that we've become such a scarlet letter society that one dumb, nonviolent transgression from decades ago that someone has learned from and never repeated stays with them as a scarlet letter for life. What incentive is there for people to learn from a mistake and better themselves if there are no second chances any more? Seems like we're making crime and reoffending a more attractive option by doing so.

Frankly, I think nonviolent first offense misdemeanor conviction records should be sealed after about 7-10 years, and never again disclosed to potential employers, insurers or credit providers unless someone offends again.

[Leonidas]

It will be interesting to see how employers defend "no misdemeanors" as a BFJQ to bar a 50 year-old from working at the GAP because she was arrested as a teen for juvenile in possession of alcoholic beverage.

The few times I've dealt with the EEOC have taught me that they seem to believe that all employers are evil and it's their mission to punish them severely. But I have to believe this kind of hiring practice is probably going to be found discriminatory, and rightly so.

Most jobs in law enforcement don't have an up-front "no misdemeanors" disqualification. The FBI says no felony convictions, my former employer says no felony or class a misdemeanors (and at least 10 years since your conviction for anything class b), most agencies have similar policies.

As perverse as some of you may think this, as far as we are concerned it really is against the law even if you're not caught. So, we do get to ask you about every criminal act you ever committed, and use that as possible disqualifier. That means that the we reject 35 year-old applicants with no criminal record (i.e. didn't get caught), stellar academic and work records because they committed a felony at age 17.

There was probably a lot of self-selection going on, but we still rejected a lot of people for on-the-record convictions. There were plenty more for all of the "didn't-get-caught" crew.

[And then there were all the "gee, I didn't know that was against the law" people - caught many of them when we started asking the questions about their sex lives.]

There are a lot of people who have broken the law, but not all got caught. This kind of hiring practice seems to be more inclined to catch up the poor and less-sophisticated. The educated executive type is better able to keep his criminality hidden than those lower on the socioeconomic ladder.

If it's not discriminatory, then run everybody through polygraph and see what shakes out.

[calmloki]

There are some people with pretty serious records that I have a lot of faith in and trust with keys and cash. There are some who are legally clean or not caught that I would not do business with or wish to associate with. Criminal history may be an indicator, but it's sure no golden standard for me.

[WhoDaresWins]

I have never even gotten a speeding ticket although I have exceeded the speed limit on any number of occasions. I was pulled over 20 years ago for speeding in Monterey CA, but the motorcycle officer let me off with a warning (the carload full of kids helped, I think). I was not REALLY speeding...it was a speed trap as you entered the tunnel at one posted speed (40) and it dropped to 25 soon after exiting which was where they picked me up.
I was also pulled over in Corning, NY about 6 years ago and after the officer looked us all over with a flashlight (we had just left a sports bar) he let us go after asking where we were headed (home, to my local hostess's house). He told me I was stopped because my car had a dealer plate "holder", or whatever it is called, around the license that he said was illegal in NY as it partially obscures the license plate. A lively co-worker was in the backseat and when we got back to PA she told everyone in the office "Tell everyone about your police record in NY". She further annoyed me because as we were pulled over, she yelped from the backseat "OMG, you had a glass of wine". Had to tell her to shut the h*ll up. Like many others here, I had to have a background check for my current job, and they check our driving record every couple of years.

The above is the extent of my "rap" sheet.

[W2R]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rescueme BTW, a speeding ticket does not fall under the felonies or misdemeanors label cited in the article W2R/F are good to go (back to w*rk, if they wish )...

I got a speeding ticket in 1999, on I-10 in St. James Parish, for 8 miles over the speed limit. It was a beautiful, spectacularly sunny Saturday morning in June, and nobody else was on the road, which was newly resurfaced, smooth, and fast.... I paid it ASAP, of course.

Luckily, paid speeding tickets are removed from one's record in Louisiana in about five years (I think?) and at any rate there is presently nothing on my record.

[NW-Bound]

Quote:

Originally Posted by hakuna matata See instead of looking it as 25% having a criminal record, ya just gotta flip it around and it sounds a lot better. Over 75% of American DON'T have a criminal record. Feel better?

No! Just think of all the other ones that have not been caught.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Leonidas The FBI says no felony convictions, my former employer says no felony or class a misdemeanors (and at least 10 years since your conviction for anything class b), most agencies have similar policies.

Can you give us some examples of class a and class b misdemeanors?

[NW-Bound]

Quote:

Originally Posted by W2R That's a relief. Of course, that could have been years ago....

Er, you've got me... Yes, it has been more than 10 years since I left that megacorp.

Yes, I admit to doing something bad, really bad since then ...

I did some dirty market timing... Multiple times in fact.

[M Paquette]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nords I did one of those last July and convicted a guy for possessing a fraction of a gram of crystal methamphetamine in a pipe. During the trial (especially during the defense attorney's objections, and the occasional offhand police witness remark) it was clear that the defendant had done things that were much worse than this, and had succeeded in pissing off most of the Honolulu Police Dept. I don't know if he actually had to go to trial on those other issues (if indeed they had the probable cause or evidence to do so) but it was pretty clear that they wanted him off the streets.

This was nothing so obvious. A husband/wife dispute that wound up with him busted on a domestic violence charge and her in on drug charges. His domestic violence was basically stopping his wife from driving by physically removing the keys from her hand. He wanted to stop her because she was whacked out of her mind from her Vicoden stash. We had to sit through two days of testimony from the arresting officer, toxicology reports, social workers, etc.

There was no evidence of any sort of physical injury. Plenty of evidence that she wasn't fit to drive, though, and her own testimony was that he had taken the keys from her hand, after which she called 911.

The DA had a campaign promise for zero tolerance on domestic violence cases, so there we were.

Lesson: Never try to stop a drunk or druggie from driving. The local DA will have you up on charges. Let them go kill themselves and some random strangers.

I should probably note that most of our local law enforcement folks are a bit saner, and would have kept this mess away from Dudley Do-Right the DA and handled it quietly. Sometimes people take 'by the book' a little too much to heart, and wind up causing more harm than good.

[obgyn65]

You have nothing to fear either from those of us who are clinicians (i.e. MDs, DOs, NPs, PAs, etc.). Felony is a bad omen if you want to keep your license active.

Quote:

Originally Posted by NW-Bound But you have nothing to fear from me, as I have never worked for the government but have been involved in works that required security clearance. And I do not even know where you live.

[ziggy29]

Quote:

Originally Posted by M Paquette This was nothing so obvious. A husband/wife dispute that wound up with him busted on a domestic violence charge and her in on drug charges. His domestic violence was basically stopping his wife from driving by physically removing the keys from her hand. He wanted to stop her because she was whacked out of her mind from her Vicoden stash. We had to sit through two days of testimony from the arresting officer, toxicology reports, social workers, etc. There was no evidence of any sort of physical injury. Plenty of evidence that she wasn't fit to drive, though, and her own testimony was that he had taken the keys from her hand, after which she called 911. The DA had a campaign promise for zero tolerance on domestic violence cases, so there we were. Lesson: Never try to stop a drunk or druggie from driving. The local DA will have you up on charges. Let them go kill themselves and some random strangers.

Hate to bring it up, but... show of hands. If the genders were reversed, does anyone think the "abusive" wife would be charged with domestic violence? And would a jury still convict?

[hakuna matata]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Leonidas [And then there were all the "gee, I didn't know that was against the law" people - caught many of them when we started asking the questions about their sex lives.]

Okay now you have me curious. What possible reason would an employer want to know about your sex life? And what would be illegal? And more importantly how could they prove it? Or are you talking sodomy laws--are they even enforceable?

[BigNick]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ziggy29 Hate to bring it up, but... show of hands. If the genders were reversed, does anyone think the "abusive" wife would be charged with domestic violence? And would a jury still convict?

Not sure about the first, but the poster told us earlier in the thread (I think) that the husband was not convicted.

[NW-Bound]

Quote:

Originally Posted by hakuna matata Okay now you have me curious. What possible reason would an employer want to know about your sex life? And what would be illegal? And more importantly how could they prove it? Or are you talking sodomy laws--are they even enforceable?

It's probably about prostitution, sex with a minor, or something like that. Or so I hope.

Quote:

Originally Posted by NW-Bound Er, you've got me... Yes, it has been more than 10 years since I left that megacorp. Yes, I admit to doing something bad, really bad since then ... I did some dirty market timing... Multiple times in fact.

Damn!

The law takes into consideration the defendant's intention and state of mind when the act was committed.

How do I change my plea to innocent now? How do they prove that I was not simply practicing "rebalancing", or at most "tactical asset allocation".

[Moemg]

[QUOTE=NW-Bound;1051290]It's probably about prostitution, sex with a minor, or something like that. Or so I hope.



/QUOTE]


Or maybe it's that playful bondage with handcuffs ?

[glippy]

I'm not surprised, I'd bet greater than 80% of it is drugs.

My SO, my little brother, and at least 1 friend have a marijuana arrest on their record. I have one friend in his 50's who had a DUI when he was 19.

It's not that surprising when 41% of the US population have used marijuana, 15% have used cocaine, and 26% of people have drank underage.

Not to mention our current and previous presidents have both used cocaine and would have criminal records themselves if only they got caught. Bush may in fact have a record due to that mysterious DUI in Maine in the early 80's that got hushed up. Clinton, too, smoked marijuana but "didn't inhale". So he too would have a record had he been caught.

Makes you wonder, when 41% of the population have all committed the same crime. - And 1 in 4 Americans have criminal records. Is it really because 1 in 4 people are nefarious, irresponsible criminals? Or is it because we live under a criminal code that reaches way beyond simply keeping people from infringing on each others' rights.

[NW-Bound]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Moemg Quote: Originally Posted by NW-Bound It's probably about prostitution, sex with a minor, or something like that. Or so I hope. Or maybe it's that playful bondage with handcuffs ?

Hmm... Interesting...

This might just give somebody another idea for a poll.

Quote:

Originally Posted by glippy Not to mention our current and previous presidents have both used cocaine and would have criminal records themselves if only they got caught. Bush may in fact have a record due to that mysterious DUI in Maine in the early 80's that got hushed up. Clinton, too, smoked marijuana but "didn't inhale". So he too would have a record had he been caught. Makes you wonder, when 41% of the population have all committed the same crime. - And 1 in 4 Americans have criminal records. Is it really because 1 in 4 people are nefarious, irresponsible criminals? Or is it because we live under a criminal code that reaches way beyond simply keeping people from infringing on each others' rights.

I myself have never inhaled anything more than cigarette smoke. And I am still suspicious of MJ users.

But the fact that ordinary citizens get caught and our nation leaders got away with it is simply awful. It's shameful!

[M Paquette]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ziggy29 And would a jury still convict?

Definitely not convicted. I think one of the first comments once we were in the jury room for deliberations was "Why the heck are we even here?"

We still took our time going over the points making up each charge, but it was pretty clear how everyone would decide.