6 ms·

OP: Put your plea at the top to get the attention of people; "Unemployed family man ran out of money". Also, regarding interviews, if you're very transparent wi

by joshmn 9y ago

OP: Put your plea at the top to get the attention of people; "Unemployed family man ran out of money". Also, regarding interviews, if you're very transparent with people they can usually find a way past what turns up in your background check. To HN: Another felon here: One of the hardest things is living with this label. There's such a stigma around it. My offense is much different than OP, but it still sucks. People seem to think "one a felon, always a felon" — which, in some cases is very true, but for every repeat customer of the courts there are 10 people who commit felonies once or twice and never do it again and go on to lead otherwise normal lives.

billmalarky 9y ago
I agree, this current order suggests he's a felon first and foremost then the rest of the page says "well I'm actually all these great things too, but they come after the fact that I'm a felon." People might believe that the felon first hierarchy is the one that really matters (and they could be right in many scenarios - even this one) but he isn't doing himself any favors by being the first to suggest it.
- _sdegutis 9y ago
  Good point, I put that first because that's going to be the biggest question in people's mind so I wanted to answer it up-front and move on to what I can offer them.
  - 0x4f3759df 9y ago
    Got a spelling error on your portfolio: "techical articles"
    - _sdegutis 9y ago
      Thanks, fixed it.
forapurpose 9y ago
> People seem to think "one a felon, always a felon" I'm not sure that's what is really going on, regardless of what people say. People have no problem doing business with known frauds, criminals and bad actors, from the CEO who cheated their co-founder to Wall Street banks to many, many more. Will nobody do business with Travis Kalanick again? The banks who sold the shady mortgage-backed securities that caused the Great Recession? There was a story the other day about prominent scientists who committed massive fraud and hardly suffered dents in their careers. Pete Carroll committed many violations of NCAA rules and ethics when coaching U. of Southern Cal football; he became a professional football coach and nobody talks about not trusting him; it seems to have had no impact on his reputation. Another example is the Catholic Church's systematic sexual abuse of children on a global scale; did everyone stop going to Catholic churches? Stop doing all business with them? I could go on forever. It's hard to put my finger on the formula, but it seems to have something to do with being on the inside, 'one of ours' or the old boy network, compared with being an outsider. (To avoid any doubt, I think the exclusion of former felons from employment is wrong. Once they've served their time, it's done. Employers shouldn't be allowed to ask with only a few exceptions (e.g., former bank robbers shouldn't be bank security guards).)
- joshmn 9y ago
  That's a bit of a false equivalency. That's like saying why not drop out of college? Bill Gates did and he turned out fine. Those positions are not a dime-a-dozen. For the regular working person, being a felon is a very heavy weight to carry and it immediately discredits or otherwise disqualifies many people, where they rarely have a chance to even have their story heard.
- DoreenMichele 9y ago
  I have been sitting here wondering if the guy who made this website is a person of color that he couldn't get his felony downgraded and keeps being rejected after people learn of his crime of felony flashing -- which is only a felony because it's a second offense. The first offense is only a misdemeanor. (Watch that second step. It's a doozey.) I get that there's a slippery slope element here and no one wants to say "Sure, flash people all you like! It's only a misdemeanor forever, no matter how many times you do it." And I get that it's additionally problematic that he flashed a minor. But 17 year olds are kind of a gray zone. I just feel like some element of the story is missing here and I find myself wondering if that element is racism, in part because I know the criminal justice system in the US basically practices systemic racism of the worst kind. I wouldn't hire him to work at a high school, but come on. Why is he still unemployed after two years over what must be one of the most minor offenses you can commit to be charged with a felony?
dragonwriter 9y ago
> but for every repeat customer of the courts there are 10 people who commit felonies once or twice and never do it again No, there aren't. Actual recidivism rates for felons are much higher, > 50% reconconvicted within 5 years of release from prison. There simply aren't ten 1-2 time felons for every serial felon.
- ebalit 9y ago
  You need to take into account that multi-recidivist will be released multiple times, biasing the statistics. I don't know what's the recidivism rates after the first release from prison, but if someone know how to get this info, I think it would be interesting.
  - dragonwriter 9y ago
    It turns out that this seems to be correct and that even though the 0-4 prior offense category still has over 50% reconconvicted after a year, even that segment is distorted by the repeat offenders, and that the 10:1 claim I rejected upthread, though I can't find direct support for it, mis plausible (one study found an 8:1 of one-and-out to repeats for first offenders; if that's right, 10:1 for 1-2 lifetime offenses vs. greater number of repeats is probably accurate or understated.)

by joshmn 9y ago

billmalarky 9y ago

I agree, this current order suggests he's a felon first and foremost then the rest of the page says "well I'm actually all these great things too, but they come after the fact that I'm a felon." People might believe that the felon first hierarchy is the one that really matters (and they could be right in many scenarios - even this one) but he isn't doing himself any favors by being the first to suggest it.

_sdegutis 9y ago
Good point, I put that first because that's going to be the biggest question in people's mind so I wanted to answer it up-front and move on to what I can offer them.
- 0x4f3759df 9y ago
  Got a spelling error on your portfolio: "techical articles"
  - _sdegutis 9y ago
    Thanks, fixed it.

forapurpose 9y ago

> People seem to think "one a felon, always a felon" I'm not sure that's what is really going on, regardless of what people say. People have no problem doing business with known frauds, criminals and bad actors, from the CEO who cheated their co-founder to Wall Street banks to many, many more. Will nobody do business with Travis Kalanick again? The banks who sold the shady mortgage-backed securities that caused the Great Recession? There was a story the other day about prominent scientists who committed massive fraud and hardly suffered dents in their careers. Pete Carroll committed many violations of NCAA rules and ethics when coaching U. of Southern Cal football; he became a professional football coach and nobody talks about not trusting him; it seems to have had no impact on his reputation. Another example is the Catholic Church's systematic sexual abuse of children on a global scale; did everyone stop going to Catholic churches? Stop doing all business with them? I could go on forever. It's hard to put my finger on the formula, but it seems to have something to do with being on the inside, 'one of ours' or the old boy network, compared with being an outsider. (To avoid any doubt, I think the exclusion of former felons from employment is wrong. Once they've served their time, it's done. Employers shouldn't be allowed to ask with only a few exceptions (e.g., former bank robbers shouldn't be bank security guards).)

joshmn 9y ago
That's a bit of a false equivalency. That's like saying why not drop out of college? Bill Gates did and he turned out fine. Those positions are not a dime-a-dozen. For the regular working person, being a felon is a very heavy weight to carry and it immediately discredits or otherwise disqualifies many people, where they rarely have a chance to even have their story heard.
DoreenMichele 9y ago
I have been sitting here wondering if the guy who made this website is a person of color that he couldn't get his felony downgraded and keeps being rejected after people learn of his crime of felony flashing -- which is only a felony because it's a second offense. The first offense is only a misdemeanor. (Watch that second step. It's a doozey.) I get that there's a slippery slope element here and no one wants to say "Sure, flash people all you like! It's only a misdemeanor forever, no matter how many times you do it." And I get that it's additionally problematic that he flashed a minor. But 17 year olds are kind of a gray zone. I just feel like some element of the story is missing here and I find myself wondering if that element is racism, in part because I know the criminal justice system in the US basically practices systemic racism of the worst kind. I wouldn't hire him to work at a high school, but come on. Why is he still unemployed after two years over what must be one of the most minor offenses you can commit to be charged with a felony?

dragonwriter 9y ago

> but for every repeat customer of the courts there are 10 people who commit felonies once or twice and never do it again No, there aren't. Actual recidivism rates for felons are much higher, > 50% reconconvicted within 5 years of release from prison. There simply aren't ten 1-2 time felons for every serial felon.

ebalit 9y ago
You need to take into account that multi-recidivist will be released multiple times, biasing the statistics. I don't know what's the recidivism rates after the first release from prison, but if someone know how to get this info, I think it would be interesting.
- dragonwriter 9y ago
  It turns out that this seems to be correct and that even though the 0-4 prior offense category still has over 50% reconconvicted after a year, even that segment is distorted by the repeat offenders, and that the 10:1 claim I rejected upthread, though I can't find direct support for it, mis plausible (one study found an 8:1 of one-and-out to repeats for first offenders; if that's right, 10:1 for 1-2 lifetime offenses vs. greater number of repeats is probably accurate or understated.)