1 in 4 US Adults Now Have Criminal Record - Around 65 Million Citizens

page: 3
47
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 24 2011 @ 12:13 PM
link   
reply to post by bandito
 





With so many educated , qualified and experienced people looking for work why would i as an employer hire a convicted criminal ?


What makes you think that convicted "criminals" lack qualifications and experience? There is a lazy ignorant assumption that the "convicted criminal" in the United States must be a murderer, thief, "Mother raper, Father stabber, Father raper!", when the harsh reality is that - and all ready pointed out by the O.P. - 95,205 in 2009 were convicted of a "drug offense", and that 65,678 were convicted of for some sort of "public order" offense. Public order is translated to mean immigration, weapons, etc., whatever etc., means in this context.

Now, you as an employer may take issue with the immigration convictions, and I will not argue this point here, but the "weapons" convictions are increasingly becoming things such as the simple possession of a pocket knife, and children are being charged with "crimes" such as this, while people like you, either vociferously or tacitly, applaud such convictions. The drug offenses are beyond ludicrous given the absurd amount of people on prescription drugs these days.




Many businesses deal in the transactions of money , private information and valuable goods and many require third party bonding . I don't care how small the conviction or how small the charge , that person has removed all doubt that they will ignore and violate the law


Legislation is not law, merely the evidence of law. With more than 600,000 acts of legislation on the federal books it is incredibly naive to believe that every single one of these acts of legislation are rooted in law. What I find criminal is that so many people have agreed to equate the arbitrary and whimsical acts of Congress as law. Law is simple, true, universal, and absolute, and in regards to justice, law is the unalienable rights of individuals. Given that all people have the unalienable right to keep and bear arms, the dubious convictions of "weapons charges" serves as just one example of legislation being equated with law.




Caught with one joint , your problem as i have no way of knowing if you'll be smoking dope on my time


You have no way of knowing whether or not someone not caught smoking a joint will do so on "your time". Unless, of course, you resort to the draconian practice of drug testing which then makes this statement of yours moot.




Petty theft , your problem as you won't get a chance to steal from me or my company . Violence for a conviction , your problem as my company works on the team aspect so you won't be coming here where in the midst of team resolutions to intimidate or fight my staff .


While petty theft and "violence" are generally state issues, a big problem in the increasing growth of Americans convicted is the priest class lawyer set. While I have pointed out that these crimes you have mentioned are generally handled on a state level, it is worth pointing out that the federal government has a 97% conviction rate. 75% of that conviction rate is after the case is gone to trial, the remainder is caused by plea bargaining, which means that defense lawyers are recommending to, at the very least, 22% of their clients that the plead down to a lesser charge, regardless of their innocence. This is a profound indictment on criminal defense attorneys, who are licensed professionals who have sworn a fealty to the courts, which means their loyalty lies with the government, not their clients.

As a professional, and given your proclivity to advocate the current system, it is fairly presumed you - at least hypothetically speaking because given your grammatical structure it is hard to buy you are truly a professional, but hey maybe not, and maybe this is who we are these days - are a licensed professional, but lawyers are licensed and look at the one single example I gave of their gross incompetence. There is also the matter of iatrogenocide, which is a term to describe the death by doctoring that occurs each year in the United States. In fact, death by doctoring - misdiagnosis, and other gross in-competencies by licensed doctors - is the third largest cause of death for people in the United States each year, which brings up the valid question regarding licensing schemes. As a licensed professional, just how incompetent are you?




A convicted criminal offers me absolutely nothing and i won't be wasting one minute looking into the particulars of your situation or conviction because the other 75% haven't been convicted of a criminal offense and that's the pool i'll draw from .


And as a licensed professional it is very likely you offer people very little. Certainly here in this thread, your willful defiance of grammar reveals a disturbing proclivity towards sloppiness, and since you are so willing to judge individuals based upon a single example of a "criminal conviction" then what is good for the goose is good for the gander, and judging you for your poor sentence structure, your seeming ignorance of paragraphs and their purpose, and grammar in general does not bode well for you, and based upon your own reasoning perhaps your customers, or clients should take a hard look at you and your business and ask themselves why they should do business with you.

edit on 24-3-2011 by Jean Paul Zodeaux because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 24 2011 @ 12:29 PM
link   
Sorry to say this for those of you who think you can actually refuse a search that is wrong, I refused a search as have many of my friends and all that does is gives the cops suspicion enough to search as I was told by the judge and the cops by not allowing a search meant I had something to hide so either way your screwed. BTW I got pulled over because my license plate wasn't where they wanted but yet visible to anyone but they used that as an excuse to pull me over and another time my tail light was not the right color for them although there was nothing in the law book about either saying it was illegal but both times I got a ticket....Cops these days are pathetic, they have a quota to fill so they will look for anything to bust you for and that's the sad truth about the people who are suppose to "serve and protect"



posted on Mar, 24 2011 @ 12:33 PM
link   
reply to post by mosheh24
 


So when you refused to comply with the search did they return to your vehicle with a warrant or arrest you?

They can be suspicious all day long and tell you're screwed six ways to Sunday and it doenst make it true. Cops routinely lie about your situation in effort to scare you into compliance. Unfortunately judges will too.



posted on Mar, 24 2011 @ 12:42 PM
link   
reply to post by mosheh24
 





Sorry to say this for those of you who think you can actually refuse a search that is wrong, I refused a search as have many of my friends and all that does is gives the cops suspicion enough to search as I was told by the judge and the cops by not allowing a search meant I had something to hide so either way your screwed.


Just because you had this experience doesn't make anyone asserting that you can refuse a search "wrong", and at best it indicates the trial judge was in error. Lower court judges routinely misapply case law, and all too often grossly misinterpret Supreme Court decisions, and police officers? I have encountered a number of police officers who have attempted to cite Terry v Ohio to justify detaining me, only to watch them discover that I have read the case law of Terry v Ohio, and in every instance it was embarrassingly clear for them, that they had never bothered to actually read this case law, and had no idea what it was they were citing. They were merely just parroting what they had been told to say.

In making clear to these officers that I was fully aware of what was held in Terry v Ohio, and assuring these officers that their detention of me could not in any way shape or form be construed as a "Terry stop", each time the officer backed off, a few of them asking me if I was a lawyer.

edit on 24-3-2011 by Jean Paul Zodeaux because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 24 2011 @ 12:48 PM
link   
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
 


Nope no search warrant I continued refusing and they said well you need to calm down or we'll have to arrest you for being to disorderly and the judge that saw my case said they had the right to search as my behavior was all they needed to search I knew it was total BS on both sides but both sides like to act high and mighty No one where I live can refuse a search without coming off suspicious it's the sad truth where I live all because of this meth problem around here, the cops here just like to harrass people and I have heard many people say they have been harassed by the local PD and the local judges do nothing and I live in Oregon BTW...I didn't buy either of them but let it go and I know I shouldn't have but attorney fees and such are a bit outrageous and have no job these days so a lawsuit wouldn't have done anything all I know is many people are having these problems, it's the police state we live in we have no freedom at all anymore and what little we do have will soon be gone.


I let them also as I didn't want to be tased as the cops here are very tase happy now that they have there little toys and actually caused someone significant brain damage for tasing them because the fell to the ground really hard and the cop who did it still has his job when the person they tased based on witness reports had no reason for tasing them.
edit on 24-3-2011 by mosheh24 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 24 2011 @ 12:51 PM
link   
Heh... this is a deep subject.

A normal society wouldn't have such problems, they have been created as a control modality.


That's all I'll say for now, multi-paragraph posts can become rather nonsensical.



posted on Mar, 24 2011 @ 12:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 


I will try that next time and see how far it gets me....I bet no where or in jail because they won't give a damn as this is Oregon not Ohio states have different laws than other states.



posted on Mar, 24 2011 @ 12:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by mosheh24
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 


I will try that next time and see how far it gets me....I bet no where or in jail because they won't give a damn as this is Oregon not Ohio states have different laws than other states.


I wouldn't try it without first reading Terry v Ohio, and given your assertion that "Ohio states have different laws than other states" it is pretty clear you have no idea how often LEO's from each state rely on the "Terry stop" ploy.

I live in California, not Ohio, and it is in this state where police officers have foolishly attempted to justify their criminality with the Supreme Court ruling of Terry v. Ohio.

You can insist on being a victim, or you can stand tall and fight for freedom. That choice is entirely yours.



posted on Mar, 24 2011 @ 12:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Mayura
 


haha so true so the sytems flawed we know it everything is about the almighty buck not much we can do without revolts or a full gov't collape that's all that needs said.....over and out!



posted on Mar, 24 2011 @ 01:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 


No one has freedom in this world no one and I have realized that and it would take a miracle of massive proportions for true freedom for all and not that imaginary freedom they spew on the MSM, face it we need to start calling ourselves the fascist socialist states of america we have had no freedom since the fed was instituted in the way early 1900's and also right after WW2 when they kept wage taxes which is illegal in peacetimes but they kept bringing war after war so they could justify taking our money. Taxes were only suppose to be inforced in war times but never left after WW2 it's the rich getting richer and the poorer getting poorer. The Patriot act only put the nail on the coffin.



posted on Mar, 24 2011 @ 01:11 PM
link   
reply to post by mosheh24
 


If you want to be a cheerleader for tyranny this is your problem. Your surrender and advocacy of tyranny is not my problem.



posted on Mar, 24 2011 @ 01:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 


haha I'm not advocating Tyranny you just don't see the world you live in....All corps, poloticians, Presidents, Foreign leaders are Tyrants they are greedy and have an extreme thirst for power and money every one of them with the exception of the very few who are just an ant compared to the people that really run this world. Tyrants have ran this world since the beginning of time and greed and power have been the horse they ride on. To stay on topic I don't consider myself a criminal but I know they consider me one which is so hypocritical of them.



posted on Mar, 24 2011 @ 01:24 PM
link   
Many places are now asking if you have ever been arrested...not "convicted" or anything...just arrested. One slip up and you lose out on an astounding number of potential employers. Of course, this makes sense if you realize that they don't want someone to get out of the penal system. That is what probation and parole is all about. You get "caught" possessing something, get put in jail, meet shady characters, miss an appointment because you have no car or license, maybe no where to live, bills accumulated e.c.t It is all there to snatch you up and CRIMINALIZE you.



posted on Mar, 24 2011 @ 02:06 PM
link   
reply to post by crimvelvet
 


I think your link to the chart is broken. Is this the chart that the link is supposed to go to?




posted on Mar, 24 2011 @ 02:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux

Originally posted by woodwardjnr
Just out of interest, are you still allowed to vote if you have a criminal record?


In the United States there are two states that impose a lifelong ban on voting for convicted felons. Those two States are Kentucky and Virginia. The registration of voting is handled by the states, and each state has their own policies regarding felony disenfranchizement.


However...most states do not automatically restore a convicted person's civil rights automatically upon termination of their sentence. Thus, they cannot vote. This generally is a fairly tedious process and most of those convicted don't even know it is available to them. Basically, the purpose is to keep the "undesireables" away from the polls. As a retired criminal attorney, I have been disturbed about this for a very long time. Nice catch.



posted on Mar, 24 2011 @ 02:15 PM
link   
I'm one of "them". Graduated from DeVry Phoenix in 1997 with a AASET degree. I graduated #1 in my class, the only 4.0 GPA out of over 300 grads. So, it would be easy enough to find out who I am with that description...

I worked as a plasma etch field engineer for Applied Materials. Then as a MRI/CT field engineer for GE Healthcare. My resume is impressive to say the least. I've travelled extensively troubleshooting/fixing problems that left other engineers scratching their heads.

Did I break the law? Yes. I commited a misdemeanor according to the VA statutes. I read them and stayed within those limits so that if I did get caught, it wouldn't ruin my life. It never occurred to me that they would manufacture a felony case against me. Call me naive.

In the past 7 years I have been turned down flat for more jobs than I can recount strictly because of that felony. The funny thing is, I'm actually a really good employee. I'm honest and customer support driven. I'm meticulous in my work practices. I'm familiar with various ISO procedures, etc, etc, etc. But, none of that matters because I am a felon.

I was living in VA and was growing a few pot plants in my spare bedroom. I was turned in by someone who got mad at me...yeah, I'm a bad guy. I supported Jim and his family for 6 months, then I told him it was time to get out on his own and he turned me in for a $1000 Crime Stopper reward...as an aside, I would have given him $10k to keep his mouth shut, but that just shows how big a loser Jim is.

So, Virginia decided to "make an example of this middle-class white guy". They lied, they manufactured evidence and they offered my lawyer favorable plea deals to convince me to plead gyuilty...I found out the last part later. When I got out of jail I was asking my lawyer why he didn't go after the cops because we had them dead-to-rights on the manufacturing evidence. He said, and I quote, "Yes, I could have fought your case harder, but I had to think about plea deals for my future clients and I didn't want to piss-off the prosecutor." You do the math.

I've never done this, but I always said I would. Here are the names of the people involved. They are from Chesterfield County, VA. They are corrupt and I am calling them out. If one of you scumsucking vultures read this, sue me for libel, I dare you.

My corrupt lawyer- Ned Mikula. He may be OK if you get caught jay walking, but beyond that, he will screw you if given a chance.

The absolutely corrupt prosecutor who not only knew the police were perjuring themselves, but encouraged them to do so- Tom McKenna.

The lead detective who illegally gathered evidence, then hid other evidence, then sat and lied to the judge's face- Ronnie Storts.

And finally, the worst of the bunch. the man who let it all happen in his courtroom with full knowledge of what was happening- judge Fred Rockwell.

May all of you burn in hell.



posted on Mar, 24 2011 @ 02:20 PM
link   
This is what happens when you mix S**t with sugar !!!



posted on Mar, 24 2011 @ 02:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Nite_wing
 





As a retired criminal attorney, I have been disturbed about this for a very long time. Nice catch.


It is always nice to see an attorney, even the retired kind, show these concerns. I spend much time railing against the priest class lawyer set, but you give me opportunity to clarify that not all lawyers belong to this church, and there still some who practice law instead of bowing down to the alter of legislation.



posted on Mar, 24 2011 @ 02:25 PM
link   
a good place to find statistics is the FBI www.fbi.gov... the unified crime report is a very intresting read

here is an interesting stat from them;

"[Nationwide, law enforcement made an estimated 13,687,241 arrests (except traffic violations) in 2009. Of these arrests, 581,765 were for violent crimes and 1,728,285 were for property crimes.]"
edit on 24-3-2011 by CaDreamer because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 24 2011 @ 02:26 PM
link   
wow i have one too





new topics
top topics
 
47
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join