4 ms·

I see your point, and I'm in favor of inclusion in the workplace, but it's not all black and white. Would you allow a convicted sexual offender who did his tim

by tcgv 5y ago

I see your point, and I'm in favor of inclusion in the workplace, but it's not all black and white. Would you allow a convicted sexual offender who did his time in jail take care of your child in a day care facility to which he got employed and didn't disclose his past conviction? Things need to be put into perspective, and evaluated carefully. With that said I don't think immediate termination was the right decision to make in that situation the parent comment described. Inclusion requires consideration and empathy, the company didn't demonstrate that.

notch656a 5y ago
I've not run a BG check on anyone who takes care of my kids. Sometimes we also hire babysitters to come take care of my child, I don't run BG check either. I probably wouldn't like it if I found out they raped a (actual, not like statutory w/ a lying 17 y/o with fake ID like happened to Cody Wilson) child, because I believe the appropriate solution for that is the death penalty, and thus I don't see them as having completed their sentence. But if someone is out in society, I treat them based on the way I have observed them to treat myself and others, rather than what the government says. A lot of sex offenses are total BS such as someone urinated in public (which is socially acceptable in many places of the world).
syshum 5y ago
>>>Things need to be put into perspective, and evaluated carefully. And leading with hyperbolic "Think of the children" hand waving pearl clutching does nothing to put "things into perspective" In the context of this thread we are talking about someone convicted of hacking wanting to work in IT again, not a child molester wanting to babysit your child. So yes lets keep things in perspective shall we?
- tcgv 5y ago
  You're right. I'm sorry if I was disrespectful with the participants in the discussion and the OP, that wasn't my intetion. It's indeed a completely different situation.
btilly 5y ago
Are you aware that an estimated 1/4 of all registered sex offenders were themselves minors when they committed their offense? And age 14 is the single year that you're most likely to become a registered sex offender? I fully understand and appreciate the purpose of our laws. The practice, however, is a different story. And unless we stop including as crimes things that I'm not willing to consider crimes, I can't support the way that "registered sex offender" is routinely used to destroy lives over childhood mistakes.
- withinboredom 5y ago
  Or the number of registered sex offenders for peeing on the side of the interstate.
- tcgv 5y ago
  I wasn't aware of that, it's suprising and sad. Thanks for pointing that out.
  - btilly 5y ago
    It is not so surprising when you consider how many laws have fixed age limits. For example a 13 year old sends an intimate picture to a 14 year old friend, the 14 year old has just committed a crime by having that picture. The law is intended to target adult pedophiles. But when the people involved are basically the same age, it isn't pedophilia!
    - notch656a 5y ago
      Yeah not to mention no mens rea is needed for statutory rape. That is a 17 y/o could show you a passport and DL with her age as 18, and tell you and look like she is 18, yet you would still be convicted. Hardly any other crime has this kind of strict liability where honest and thorough due diligence doesn't absolve you of the crime.

by tcgv 5y ago

notch656a 5y ago

I've not run a BG check on anyone who takes care of my kids. Sometimes we also hire babysitters to come take care of my child, I don't run BG check either. I probably wouldn't like it if I found out they raped a (actual, not like statutory w/ a lying 17 y/o with fake ID like happened to Cody Wilson) child, because I believe the appropriate solution for that is the death penalty, and thus I don't see them as having completed their sentence. But if someone is out in society, I treat them based on the way I have observed them to treat myself and others, rather than what the government says. A lot of sex offenses are total BS such as someone urinated in public (which is socially acceptable in many places of the world).

syshum 5y ago

>>>Things need to be put into perspective, and evaluated carefully. And leading with hyperbolic "Think of the children" hand waving pearl clutching does nothing to put "things into perspective" In the context of this thread we are talking about someone convicted of hacking wanting to work in IT again, not a child molester wanting to babysit your child. So yes lets keep things in perspective shall we?

tcgv 5y ago
You're right. I'm sorry if I was disrespectful with the participants in the discussion and the OP, that wasn't my intetion. It's indeed a completely different situation.

btilly 5y ago

Are you aware that an estimated 1/4 of all registered sex offenders were themselves minors when they committed their offense? And age 14 is the single year that you're most likely to become a registered sex offender? I fully understand and appreciate the purpose of our laws. The practice, however, is a different story. And unless we stop including as crimes things that I'm not willing to consider crimes, I can't support the way that "registered sex offender" is routinely used to destroy lives over childhood mistakes.

withinboredom 5y ago
Or the number of registered sex offenders for peeing on the side of the interstate.
tcgv 5y ago
I wasn't aware of that, it's suprising and sad. Thanks for pointing that out.
- btilly 5y ago
  It is not so surprising when you consider how many laws have fixed age limits. For example a 13 year old sends an intimate picture to a 14 year old friend, the 14 year old has just committed a crime by having that picture. The law is intended to target adult pedophiles. But when the people involved are basically the same age, it isn't pedophilia!
  - notch656a 5y ago
    Yeah not to mention no mens rea is needed for statutory rape. That is a 17 y/o could show you a passport and DL with her age as 18, and tell you and look like she is 18, yet you would still be convicted. Hardly any other crime has this kind of strict liability where honest and thorough due diligence doesn't absolve you of the crime.