It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
In 2009, over 7.2 million people were on probation, in jail or prison, or on parole at yearend — 3.1% of all U.S. adult residents or 1 in every 32 adults. The total correctional population declined (down 0.7% or 48,800 offenders) during 2009, the first decline observed in the population since the Bureau of Justice Statistics began reporting this population in 1980.
At yearend 2009 a total of 4,203,967 adult men and women were on probation and 819,308 were on parole or mandatory conditional release following a prison term.
State and federal prison authorities had jurisdiction over 1,613,740 prisoners at yearend 2009: 1,405,622 under state jurisdiction and 208,118 under federal jurisdiction.
Local jails held 760,400 adults awaiting trial or serving a sentence at midyear 2009.
Accessibility of records: From among the estimated 71 million criminal records in the U.S.,
Many people who have a criminal record that shows up
on a background check have never been convicted of a
crime; in fact, one-third of felony arrests never lead to
conviction. U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics, Felony
Defendants in Large Urban Counties, 2004 (April 2008).
The Blumstein-Graddy Study (1968-1977)
In 1983, Alfred Blumstein and Elizabeth Graddy examined 1968-1977 arrest statistics from the country's fifty-six largest cities.23 Looking only at felony arrests, Blumstein and Graddy found that one out of every four males living in a large city could expect to be arrested for a felony at some time in his lifetime.24 When broken down by race, however, a nonwhite male was three and a half times more likely to have a felony arrest on his record than was a white male.25 Whereas only 14% of white males would be arrested, 51 % of nonwhite males could anticipate being arrested for a felony at some time during their lifetimes.26
Blumstein and Graddy did not include misdemeanors, which make up the largest share of arrests and bookings, in their calculations. Had they included misdemeanors, the percentage of nonwhite males who could expect to be arrested and at least briefly jailed would have reached Blumstein's original prediction of 90%. As appalling as Blumstein's original numbers seemed, they were confirmed by others over the ensuing two decades.27
The Sentencing Project Survey (1989)
In 1990, the nonprofit Washington, D.C.-based "Sentencing Project" released a survey revealing that on an average day in the United States, one of every four African American men age twenty to twenty-nine was either in prison or jail or on probation or parole.36 The study caused a brief flurry in the media, but evoked little follow-up. The implications were far more ominous than the "1 in 4" headlines suggested. The next logical question went unasked by the press. If one in four young African American males are under correctional supervision on any one day, what percentage have been or will be drawn into the justice system? As it turned out, the Sentencing Project's figures pointed to a criminal justice disaster.
Our estimates suggest that in 2008 there were between 5.4 and 6.1 million ex-prisoners (compared to a prison population of about 1.5 million and a jail population of about 0.8 million in that same year). Our calculations also suggest that in 2008 there were between 12.3 and 13.9 million ex-felons.
In 2008, about one in 33 working-age adults was an ex-prisoner and about one in 15 working-age adults was an ex-felon. About one in 17 adult men of working-age was an ex-prisoner and about one in 8 was an ex-felon.
The rise in the ex-offender population – and the resulting employment and output losses – overwhelmingly reflects changes in the U.S. criminal justice system, not changes in underlying criminal activity. Instead, dramatic increases in sentencing, especially for drug-related offenses, account for the mushrooming of the ex-offender population that we document here.
People have criminal records because they break the law.
Trying to argue the written law after the fact is nonsensincal.
Trying to drum up excuses like "what about those that needed the pot for medicinal purposes?" is lame. I'll give you 1/100000 of 1% of mary-jane related offences have to do with folks trying to get it for medicinal purposes. The rest are dopers and pushers.
Some advice; stop smoking the stuff
Random drug screenings kept the dope smokers out too.
Originally posted by henriquefd
I wouldn't put the blame on hiring companies. Come on, if your country has 25% off its population(or is it 25% of its work force?) with a crime record, companies are not to blame.
I don't know labor laws in US, but Brazil has one of the worst, most archaic and unbalanced labor laws in the planet! So, yeah, I would NEVER hire ANYONE with a crime record. That's not me being different. That's the norm around here. A few things that prevents you from getting hired here in BrazilÇ
1) Having a crime record
2) Having sued your ex-employer
3) Changing jobs too often
4) Having too many kids
5) No previous working experience(this one is a killer for the young people. Boy, do they suffer.
6) Being a young woman about to get married or recently married(nobody wants to hire a woman that could get pregnant anytime soon)
That's a few, but depending on the kind of company, you get some especific ones as well.
Maybe part of the statistic is to blame on the COPs TV show? Something that always seemed wrong to me is arresting people for soliciting service from a prostitute, especially when a female cops plays the role of a prostitude. I mean, come on... Do you guys really need MORE people in jail? Better let the guy pay for his prostitute than having the population paying the police to hunt those harmless people and putting them in jail, wasting a LOT of the tax payers money. Another stupid show is the Bait car. Funny to watch, but instead of fabricating a crime, go after crimes really happening. Geez. I get the feeling there is just not enough crime going on in US when cops have to fabricate them to justify their paycheck...
Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
Originally posted by ldyserenity
Just like telling smokers to quit smoking cigarettes so they can get work; it's simple don't do drugs amd don't wind up in jail. Why is it not ok to discriminate against drug addicts/users/criminals when they sure AS H*** Discriminate against people doing a LEGAL substance?
Are you really surprised? DON'T DO DRUGS! SIMPLEedit on 24-3-2011 by ldyserenity because: emoticon
Wait...two wrongs do make a right? I did not know that! Thank you, oh wise one. I am going to go out and double my wrongs so I can be as right as rain.
WTH is wrong with you bud?
Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
Since you bring up the parole issue, what the hell is that about?
Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
This whole system for convicted felons seems to be all about disenfranchisement. Prior to 1930 there was no such thing as a parole board, which means that people convicted of a crime did their time and upon release, that was that.
Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
Now, government seems to think that once convicted that person is no longer a person but property of the government.
Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
What is the point of doing time if once that time has been done, the convicted person is still doing time in some other fashion?
Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
It is really just another justification for the aggregation of power.
Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
As to your initial question, as an employer, I want to hire the best person for the job, and as a critical thinker much has to be weighed when making a decision. I have worked several jobs in my lifetime, and I have known many people never convicted of a crime that stole from their employers, and created all kinds of grief and hassles, so the fact that a person has a clean criminal record is not, by any stretch of the imagination, a safeguard against any thing than the parole officer issue you brought up.
Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
If business owners are investing in "brighter futures" then why does this nations economy look so bleak today?
Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
Your view of employers is one from rose colored glasses, of which you seem to wear in way similar to Janet Reno...
Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
The United States imprisons more people, per capita, than any other industrialized nation on the planet. That means more people than China. That means more people than the Soviet Union ever did at the height of their tyranny.
Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
Is this fact because Americans are a bunch of criminals? Some, no doubt are, but all? Are you so naive as to think that government can be trusted, and the fact that the U.S. imprisons more people per capita than any other industrialized nation is due to the fact that our government is so trustworthy?
Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
Don't piss on my back and tell me it's raining.
People have criminal records because they break the law.
A very high number of those laws are unjust.
Trying to argue the written law after the fact is nonsensincal.
What? It's nonsensical to argue against unjust laws? You are very obedient. Would have made a fine slave catcher. Some of us have the ability to think for ourselves and follow our own moral compass.
Trying to drum up excuses like "what about those that needed the pot for medicinal purposes?" is lame. I'll give you 1/100000 of 1% of mary-jane related offences have to do with folks trying to get it for medicinal purposes. The rest are dopers and pushers.
Don't think so baby, you are obviously highly ignorant on the subject. And what exactly is wrong with being a "doper"? Better that than a drunkard or tobacco fiend. And what is wrong with being a "pusher" of safe, illegal drugs? Better that than the liquor store and gas station pushers of the most deadly, damaging and addictive drugs on the planet. Good to see you have picked up on the governments propaganda terminology though. The pharmaceutical and alcohol industries will be proud.
Some advice; stop smoking the stuff
My advice to anyone: Don't obey unjust laws, live free. No one has the authority to dictate how you spend your existence and what medicines or recreational drugs you use. No one owns you unless you let them.
"If the words 'life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness' don't include the right to experiment with your own consciousness, then the Declaration of Independence isn't worth the hemp it was written on."
— Terence McKenna
Random drug screenings kept the dope smokers out too.
But it kept the drunks and users of hard drugs in.
No it's nonsensical to argue them after you knowingly (with your self-thought and moral compass) break them and then get busted.