Posted on 06/29/2016 4:43:22 AM PDT by Kaslin
Just got out of jail? Odds are that within five years, you'll get caught doing something illegal and go back to jail.
This is bad for ex-cons, their victims, their families and America.
Some of these people, of course, are career criminals who ought to stay in jail. But most are people who deserve another chance. They are more likely to stay straight if they find work. Work gives people purpose. It fills the idle hours that get many people into trouble.
But America makes it extra hard for ex-cons to find work. Some states make it illegal.
Illinois bans ex-convicts from more than 118 professions.
I understand why people might not want ex-cons to be bank security guards or cops, but in many states (Illinois isn't unusual) the list of forbidden jobs goes way beyond that.
The Illinois Policy Institute, a free-market group that tries to get these laws tossed out, reports that ex-cons must give up on trying to become a nurse, architect, interior designer, dancehall operator, teacher, dietician, acupuncturist, cosmetologist, buyer of slaughtered livestock, geologist, etc.
Why? Who cares if a livestock buyer or geologist once served time? If employers want to hire him, why tell them, "No"?
When Lisa Creason was 19, she tried to steal from a cash register at a Subway sandwich shop. She says she only stole because she needed food for her baby. Creason was caught and arrested, and she served a year in jail.
Twenty years later, Creason graduated from nursing school. But when she went to take the test that would allow her to get a nursing license, she learned that because she was once convicted of a "forcible felony," her career path was impossible.
She said it felt as if the bureaucrats had told her: "I was meant to be in the 'hood, meant to be on government assistance."
This is not a good message.
"Lisa is a great example of someone who has changed her life," says the Institute's Kristina Rasmussen on my TV show this week. "She is reformed. She wants to be a productive member of society." It has been 20 years since Lisa committed her crime, "but government gets in the way of her pursuing her profession."
The good news is "this year we got a bill passed and it will go to the governor. So there is hope for Lisa Creason."
It's hard to get rid of bad laws. It happens one reform at a time.
No one says that crimes these convicts committed don't matter, but punishing them forever doesn't help. Rasmussen says, "You went to jail, you paid your debt to society. Coming out, how are we going to treat you? Are we going to deny you work that keeps you and your family out of trouble ... deny you that opportunity, and you turn either to a life of crime again or dependency?"
Why do states have so many restrictions? "There are two forces at work," says Rasmussen. "One, government bureaucrats like being busybodies, deciding who gets to do what." They think that makes the world safer.
But there's another factor. "You have people who don't welcome competition," says Rasmussen. Existing businesses and unions don't like newcomers on their turf. "Who's easier to kick out of the pool of potential competitors than people just emerging out of the criminal justice system?"
Existing businesses -- the insiders -- fund politicians who pass rules that make it hard for newcomers to compete with them. The politicians convince themselves that their rules protect customers. But mostly, their rules protect the insiders.
But some competing businesses want to hire ex-cons, and when that works out, it's good for the businesses, their customers and the ex-cons. A Chicago suburb diner called Felony Franks hires only ex-felons, its policy being "that once a person has paid their debt to society after being convicted of a crime, that he or she should have the same rights and opportunities as others."
Of course, some ex-cons can be trusted while others cannot. But it's important to let employers and customers make those calls -- not a controlling, insider-protecting one-size-fits-all government.
Thank you all for your wise words and encouragement. The last time people raised concerns our pastor cried at the pulpit at how hard we make things, reminded us that “such were some of you.”. He used to not reveal anything about the crimes until it blew up when a member did some research and found we had the most dangerous sex offender in the county (out on a technicality) in our congregation. We sat with him, he interacted with our kids and we had no idea. Pastor was completely fooled until someone convinced him to look at the guy’s records-he realized what a con artist the guy was.
Is “cutting hair” one of the “jobs he lists”?
Not our problem. The convict’s problem. He should have thought of that before committing the offense.
I might be willing to accept bonding as as part of the prison system. Maybe it could be part of a work-release system? The business case could be pitting the cost of funding a bonding system against the cost of welfare and recidivism.
But, after demonstrating poor decision making, and enjoying years in ‘Crime U,’ trust is something the convict will have to earn. He does not get it automatically.
Nope, but looked the character up. As I read, I thought "Dickensian." Sure enough, the genius of that age.
You can get a job here in California. Employers would not be allowed to ask if you committed any crime. I guess this means more gov’t workers.
How long does he keep paying the price for a "poor decision?" How long have you paid the price for poor decisions you've made?
I never said you should trust him "automatically." I just said his rights should be restored. He should earn trust the same way anyone else does, even starting a little behind the rest of the pack.
And by the way, it IS our problem. It's our windows that are getting broken. And it's our tax dollars that pay to keep repeat offenders in jail. And it's very likely that an offender will repeat if he's left with very few options except to commit more crimes. What's wrong with opening the door to a more legitimate life?
********************
There has to be more to this story. First-time offenders don't usually serve a year in prison for "trying" to steal.
He quickly made it clear that he would not be willing to take an entry level job and "have to put up with kids" as coworkers at the same level. He had previously worked at a McDonalds, but was not willing to get a similar job again "at his age."
No law or program would have helped this guy realize he couldn't take his pride to the bank. He had no concept of making a start by getting his foot in the door, or delaying gratification for awhile; he simply gave himself no shot. Dropped out of sight soon after, and while I don't exactly know what happened to him next I can make a pretty good guess.
What is wrong with forcing an employer to take a questionable employee, or withholding information information needed to make decision on employment?
Employers need to be able to what is good for them and their businesses. Things are hard enough. Why should they accept extra risk?
Too bad we can’t just transport them. Australia turned out okay.
It lasts forever. Or at least as long as the damage you did lasts. Certainly, some of my poor decisions have stuck with me.
Frankly, I have issues with birthright privileges. IMHO, citizenship should be earned - and forfeited if you are convicted of a felony. There should be a re-earn that that citizenship, but sitting in the cooler for X number years is not part of it.
Send People Like Michael Jackson To Lifetime Halfway Houses In Alaska
By Alan Srout
May 9, 2005
The increasing number and frequency of sexual assaults, molestations, rapes and murders of children by adults is spiraling out of control in the United States. One need only watch the news, go online or read a newspaper to have sexual crimes against children staring you in the face. Everyday, we see pictures of Jessica Lunsford’s ‘alleged’ murdered, John Couey, Michael Jackson, Mary Kay Letorneau, and on and on. This evil plague must end. Since the state cannot afford to keep these criminals in prison, and recent reports show us that ankle bracelets to track their whereabouts are easily defeated, we, as a society must come up with a solution. I think that I have one, but it won’t sit well with the ACLU and their fellow travelers.
Most of Alaska is owned by the Federal government, and the land is not being used for much of anything at the moment. I propose that the U.S. government build large camps, in the wilds of Alaska, similar to the leper colonies of a previous era, to house convicted sex offenders after or instead of prison. These would not be prisons, per se, but “lifetime halfway houses” where people of a like mind can be with their own. Residents may engage in farming, arts & crafts, roadbuilding, forestry and other useful pursuits, while earning money for restitution for their victims. The camps would quickly become mostly self-sufficient in food and many materials(clothing, etc) Residents would, of course, not be allowed to leave the confines of the camp unless escorted by security personnel, and then only for essential purposes. My solution would save the taxpayers billions in a short time and keep offenders off the streets shared by our children.
If you agree with my plan, contact your Congressperson or Senator at the Capitol Switchboard: (202) 224-3121. Don’t know who your Congressional representative is? Go here: http://www.congress.org/congressorg/dbq/officials/directory/directory.dbq?command=congdir
http://www.useless-knowledge.com/1234/may/article120.html
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.