7 ms·

Even the president is in favor of punishing people who have been suspected of crimes; it seems to be a popular position that people are not really innocent unti

by nickff 11y ago

Even the president is in favor of punishing people who have been suspected of crimes; it seems to be a popular position that people are not really innocent until proven guilty.[1][2] I find this trend deeply troubling, but it does seem at least somewhat popular. #2 is at least partly due to the fact the if the companies allowed him an opportunity to refute the claim, they would be incurring various legal liabilities. The rules meant to protect job candidates often result in them being passed over at the first stage where it is realized they are 'complex' cases. [1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2015/12/04/can-americans-be-denied-second-amendment-rights-because-the-attorney-general-suspects-theyre-terrorists/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/201... [2] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2015/12/06/what-could-possibly-be-the-argument-for-allowing-a-terrorist-suspect-to-buy-a-semiautomatic-weapon/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/201...

sdrothrock 11y ago
> #2 is at least partly due to the fact the if the companies allowed him an opportunity to refute the claim, they would be incurring various legal liabilities. Interesting! I'd thought it was simply done in the name of efficiency.
- kiba 11y ago
  You're too old. You have a criminal background. You're too overeducated. We think you'll sue. You're too young. It seemed that companies are loathed to take risk on employee. At the same time, lot of environments contained toxic working conditions, so it's not clear if their choice of employees matter much. But people must find a job to keep themselves afloat or depend on someone having a job. It didn't matter if you're bad at social grace or if you have mental illness or if you're a felon, old or young. Without food, shelter, and peace of mind, I think people would be hard pressed to be economically productive.
  - raverbashing 11y ago
    At the same time, there are a lot of employees suing companies "just because", so the feeling has some justification.
    - kiba 11y ago
      And where do those employees find the money to sue the corporation? Don't forget that it doesn't prevent the creation of toxic working environments.
      - morgante 11y ago
        > And where do those employees find the money to sue the corporation? Often from lawyers who work on contingency and then take the bulk of the damages.
      - gambiting 11y ago
        My home insurance includes legal cover in case I wanted to sue my employer for almost any reason, or if I am sued by them(up to half a million pounds, so ~$750k).
    - coldtea 11y ago
      Only in places like the modern US, where suing is a kind of hobby, and you can be sued for anything. In other places (and in the US in the past) neither the companies expect to be sued and take pre-emptive measures, nor the employees sue "just because". At least not any significant numbers.
      - rmc 11y ago
        Really? But the right wing in the UK keep insisting it's because of all that red tape from Brussels and the EU? How can the USA, being free from the yoke of Eurocrats, have such similar problems???
        dgoldstein0 11y ago
ekianjo 11y ago
> it seems to be a popular position that people are not really innocent until proven guilty Shouldnt that be instead: "people are somewhat guilty until proven innocent" based on the links you shared?
- jpindar 11y ago
  Parse it as: people are not really "innocent until proven guilty".

by nickff 11y ago

sdrothrock 11y ago

> #2 is at least partly due to the fact the if the companies allowed him an opportunity to refute the claim, they would be incurring various legal liabilities. Interesting! I'd thought it was simply done in the name of efficiency.

kiba 11y ago
You're too old. You have a criminal background. You're too overeducated. We think you'll sue. You're too young. It seemed that companies are loathed to take risk on employee. At the same time, lot of environments contained toxic working conditions, so it's not clear if their choice of employees matter much. But people must find a job to keep themselves afloat or depend on someone having a job. It didn't matter if you're bad at social grace or if you have mental illness or if you're a felon, old or young. Without food, shelter, and peace of mind, I think people would be hard pressed to be economically productive.
- raverbashing 11y ago
  At the same time, there are a lot of employees suing companies "just because", so the feeling has some justification.
  - kiba 11y ago
    And where do those employees find the money to sue the corporation? Don't forget that it doesn't prevent the creation of toxic working environments.
    - morgante 11y ago
      > And where do those employees find the money to sue the corporation? Often from lawyers who work on contingency and then take the bulk of the damages.
    - gambiting 11y ago
      My home insurance includes legal cover in case I wanted to sue my employer for almost any reason, or if I am sued by them(up to half a million pounds, so ~$750k).
  - coldtea 11y ago
    Only in places like the modern US, where suing is a kind of hobby, and you can be sued for anything. In other places (and in the US in the past) neither the companies expect to be sued and take pre-emptive measures, nor the employees sue "just because". At least not any significant numbers.
    - rmc 11y ago
      Really? But the right wing in the UK keep insisting it's because of all that red tape from Brussels and the EU? How can the USA, being free from the yoke of Eurocrats, have such similar problems???
      - dgoldstein0 11y ago

ekianjo 11y ago

> it seems to be a popular position that people are not really innocent until proven guilty Shouldnt that be instead: "people are somewhat guilty until proven innocent" based on the links you shared?

jpindar 11y ago
Parse it as: people are not really "innocent until proven guilty".