5 ms·

>Upon entry of judgment after his sentencing, John Steele will be a convicted felon with a federal fraud conviction. His career as a lawyer — or, more generally

>Upon entry of judgment after his sentencing, John Steele will be a convicted felon with a federal fraud conviction. His career as a lawyer — or, more generally, as a gainfully employed person — is over. While I share everyone's hatred of the tactics these people have employed over the years, I also hate that felons in the US are given such a hard time after they have served their sentences. People make mistakes and should be allowed to move on from them. A couple of years in federal prison shouldn't carry with it a lifetime of financial despair.

cmdkeen 10y ago
Whilst I agree with your criticism of the treatment of felons in the US in most jurisdictions a conviction for a crime of dishonesty, especially one in a professional context, will haunt you for life. In the context of this specific individual it would be a bold company that put him in a position to have any influence over money, management or clients.
- rfrey 10y ago
  For sure, that covers the "career as a lawyer" part. It's the "as a gainfully employed person" that is troubling.
- LeifCarrotson 10y ago
  It makes sense that it would. But should it also make it difficult for him to find housing, to benefit from aid programs like food stamps, or to flip burgers for minimum wage? If John Steele can't get housing, can't get food, and can't get a job, but is also supposed to obey the law on penalty of more jail time or another felony on his record, what's he likely to do?
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - nojvek 10y ago
    Suppose someone is a felon, can the average Joe run a background check to know what crime was committed? I.e would happily hire someone who was caught in possession of marijuana or a bit of drugs, but not a pedophile, mobster or serial killer.
  - djrogers 10y ago
    Point of clarification, a felony fraud conviction wouldn't prevent him from getting food stamps or any other aid. There are 6 states that have restrictions on drug felons getting food stamps, perhaps that's where you're claim comes from?
VLM 10y ago
There's too many qualified people and not enough jobs to go around. Under those conditions, which person without a felony would you like to volunteer to take his place and no longer be gainfully employed? There's already plenty in that situation, perhaps this felony conviction means a non-felon can now become gainfully employed, which is good news.
- AshleyGrant 10y ago
  And how exactly is forcing felons who have served their time to become homeless due to a complete inability to become employed good news?
  - Thrillington 10y ago
    It's great news to the I've-got-mine libertarian insanity that's so prevalent on this site.
  - VLM 10y ago
    Its great news for those who have not served time but have become homeless due to a complete inability to become employed. No matter how thin you slice the piece of cheese there's always going to be a top half and a bottom half and agonizing over the suffering result of intentional misbehavior, ignores the larger pool of suffering experienced by those who never did anything wrong, other than maybe not be born in the right place, or to the right parents, or the right skin color, or the right gender, etc. I'm not going to wring my hands at the injustice committed against a felon because some law school grad who never committed a felony can now get a law job, solely because a felon can't. I find it hilarious social commentary that the average HN commenter commiserates with felons but not with the lower 99% of the working population.
    - _jal 10y ago
      Before you laugh yourself silly at the hilarity, you may give some thought to the various paths to being labeled a felon. Put the Prenda sociopaths aside, and look at the treatment of members of that 99% on the school->prison pipeline, as just one example. You might just find that the injustices you do recognize are linked to the ones you laugh at.
whack 10y ago
I recognise that what I'm going to say next will be very unpopular on HN. Harsh punishments work exceedingly well as a deterrent. Harsh punishments make other prospective law breakers think twice before harming innocent people. I can agree with the notion that petty criminals deserve second chances, but what this guy did isn't petty at all. If even one innocent person is spared the ordeal of victimization, then harsh punishments are well worth the costs.
- watwut 10y ago
  Most criminals don't do calculated risks and inability to integrate back to society (e.g. find job) makes one more likely to commit crime again. USA does not have lower criminality rates then other western countries.
- AdmiralAsshat 10y ago
  Not really, especially when they're not applied consistently. "Harsh punishments" are disproportionately applied to the poor, which in turn increases recidivism when they feel they have no other option.
- maxerickson 10y ago
  The United States Department of Justice disagrees with you: https://www.nij.gov/five-things/pages/deterrence.aspx https://www.nij.gov/five-things/pages/deterrence.aspx (NIJ is research arm of the DOJ)
- freehunter 10y ago
  Our overcrowded prisons and high prisoner-per-capita rate stands as one piece of evidence against that. We keep throwing people in jail for long periods of time, but people keep committing crimes and former criminals keep committing crimes again at a higher rate than other countries whose criminal justice programs focus on rehabilitation instead of punishment. In fact, the ability for ex-convicts to get jobs after they're released is associated with lower rates of recidivism (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recidivism#Employment_and_recidivism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recidivism#Employment_and_reci...) You say that your comment will be very unpopular with HN, but it seems to me that it's actually very unpopular with facts and statistics.

cmdkeen 10y ago

Whilst I agree with your criticism of the treatment of felons in the US in most jurisdictions a conviction for a crime of dishonesty, especially one in a professional context, will haunt you for life. In the context of this specific individual it would be a bold company that put him in a position to have any influence over money, management or clients.

rfrey 10y ago
For sure, that covers the "career as a lawyer" part. It's the "as a gainfully employed person" that is troubling.
LeifCarrotson 10y ago
It makes sense that it would. But should it also make it difficult for him to find housing, to benefit from aid programs like food stamps, or to flip burgers for minimum wage? If John Steele can't get housing, can't get food, and can't get a job, but is also supposed to obey the law on penalty of more jail time or another felony on his record, what's he likely to do?
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- nojvek 10y ago
  Suppose someone is a felon, can the average Joe run a background check to know what crime was committed? I.e would happily hire someone who was caught in possession of marijuana or a bit of drugs, but not a pedophile, mobster or serial killer.
- djrogers 10y ago
  Point of clarification, a felony fraud conviction wouldn't prevent him from getting food stamps or any other aid. There are 6 states that have restrictions on drug felons getting food stamps, perhaps that's where you're claim comes from?

VLM 10y ago

There's too many qualified people and not enough jobs to go around. Under those conditions, which person without a felony would you like to volunteer to take his place and no longer be gainfully employed? There's already plenty in that situation, perhaps this felony conviction means a non-felon can now become gainfully employed, which is good news.

AshleyGrant 10y ago
And how exactly is forcing felons who have served their time to become homeless due to a complete inability to become employed good news?
- Thrillington 10y ago
  It's great news to the I've-got-mine libertarian insanity that's so prevalent on this site.
- VLM 10y ago
  Its great news for those who have not served time but have become homeless due to a complete inability to become employed. No matter how thin you slice the piece of cheese there's always going to be a top half and a bottom half and agonizing over the suffering result of intentional misbehavior, ignores the larger pool of suffering experienced by those who never did anything wrong, other than maybe not be born in the right place, or to the right parents, or the right skin color, or the right gender, etc. I'm not going to wring my hands at the injustice committed against a felon because some law school grad who never committed a felony can now get a law job, solely because a felon can't. I find it hilarious social commentary that the average HN commenter commiserates with felons but not with the lower 99% of the working population.
  - _jal 10y ago
    Before you laugh yourself silly at the hilarity, you may give some thought to the various paths to being labeled a felon. Put the Prenda sociopaths aside, and look at the treatment of members of that 99% on the school->prison pipeline, as just one example. You might just find that the injustices you do recognize are linked to the ones you laugh at.

whack 10y ago

I recognise that what I'm going to say next will be very unpopular on HN. Harsh punishments work exceedingly well as a deterrent. Harsh punishments make other prospective law breakers think twice before harming innocent people. I can agree with the notion that petty criminals deserve second chances, but what this guy did isn't petty at all. If even one innocent person is spared the ordeal of victimization, then harsh punishments are well worth the costs.

watwut 10y ago
Most criminals don't do calculated risks and inability to integrate back to society (e.g. find job) makes one more likely to commit crime again. USA does not have lower criminality rates then other western countries.
AdmiralAsshat 10y ago
Not really, especially when they're not applied consistently. "Harsh punishments" are disproportionately applied to the poor, which in turn increases recidivism when they feel they have no other option.
maxerickson 10y ago
The United States Department of Justice disagrees with you: https://www.nij.gov/five-things/pages/deterrence.aspx https://www.nij.gov/five-things/pages/deterrence.aspx (NIJ is research arm of the DOJ)
freehunter 10y ago
Our overcrowded prisons and high prisoner-per-capita rate stands as one piece of evidence against that. We keep throwing people in jail for long periods of time, but people keep committing crimes and former criminals keep committing crimes again at a higher rate than other countries whose criminal justice programs focus on rehabilitation instead of punishment. In fact, the ability for ex-convicts to get jobs after they're released is associated with lower rates of recidivism (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recidivism#Employment_and_recidivism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recidivism#Employment_and_reci...) You say that your comment will be very unpopular with HN, but it seems to me that it's actually very unpopular with facts and statistics.