Should a conviction still be allowed to hold ex-felons back?

[DaemonSeid]

Originally Posted by als463

I'm half and half on this issue. Would I want to work next to a rapist? No. Do I think "CERTAIN" convictions deserve a second chance? Yes. I work with people (Patients) who may possibly have drug convictions. It's heartbreaking to me to see some young kids/ adults come out of prison for selling marijuana and now they can't find a job. It sucks for them. Sure, they made a mistake but, if we are going to try and help them, let them work. I have a strong belief that we should help rehabilitate people before just turning them away or locking them up...for "CERTAIN" offenses. Sex offenders, now that is a different story.

Problem with sex offenders is this:

To what degree are you talking? You have people that may have some naked pics on their phone and get labeled and lumped in right along with people who are out and out bonafide pedophiles...so how do you make the distinction?

[als463]

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid

Problem with sex offenders is this:

To what degree are you talking? You have people that may have some naked pics on their phone and get labeled and lumped in right along with people who are out and out bonafide pedophiles...so how do you make the distinction?

Oh, no...I agree with that. There is a difference between a guy who is a complete pedophile and a kid who got in trouble for dating a 16 year-old girl, when he was 18 years-old because the girl's mom and dad didn't like him very much. If you are a Megan's Offender, which is the harshest of the harsh sex offenders, then in my eyes, you shouldn't leave prison. I have little tolerance for sex offenders.

As far as some young kid who got mixed up with the wrong crowd and sold drugs, I think he (or she, I'm not stereotyping) should get a second chance.

[33girl]

Originally Posted by PiKA2001

So if some felonies are weighted more than others, should employers even ask if the candidate have a criminal background? I know there is the felony box, but isn't there an area below it asking if you have a criminal history, please explain?

I think what happens in some cases is if there are lots of applicants, the hirer just breezes through and sees if that box is checked "yes" or "no." If it's yes - file 13.

[preciousjeni]

Originally Posted by 33girl

I think what happens in some cases is if there are lots of applicants, the hirer just breezes through and sees if that box is checked "yes" or "no." If it's yes - file 13.

*Most* cases.

[als463]

[QUOTE=PiKA2001;1968126]

Originally Posted by als463

Oh, no...I agree with that. There is a difference between a guy who is a complete pedophile and a kid who got in trouble for dating a 16 year-old girl, when he was 18 years-old because the girl's mom and dad didn't like him very much. If you are a Megan's Offender, which is the harshest of the harsh sex offenders, then in my eyes, you shouldn't leave prison. I have little tolerance for sex offenders.

As far as some young kid who got mixed up with the wrong crowd and sold drugs, I think he (or she, I'm not stereotyping) should get a second chance.[/QUOTE

So if some felony's are weighted more than others, should employers even ask if the candidate have a criminal background? I know there is the felony box, but isn't there an area below it asking if you have a criminal history, please explain?

I don't really think we should leave it up to just someone checking a box. Some people may be afraid of the outcome and check "NO" while the supervisor doesn't even do a background check. I think that a background check should be done, with the person's permission. If the person automatically denies wanting to have a background check done, then that should be a red flag. If you're a Megan's offender, the answer for me hiring you would be NO!

[33girl]

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid

Problem with sex offenders is this:

To what degree are you talking? You have people that may have some naked pics on their phone and get labeled and lumped in right along with people who are out and out bonafide pedophiles...so how do you make the distinction?

That's why there's a problem with the designation "felons" in general. There are things considered felonies that would give someone pause about their safety, and there are things, like embezzlement, that the person who did them might not be the least bit violent.