[banned1]

That’s one narrative.

The other narrative is that for $10 bucks I can protect myself, my family, and my business from terrible people.

Whether they are terrible or “misguided” is up to me to decide, as it is whether to employ them or not.

Again, not everybody in jail deserves humane treatment. There are animals in there. Maybe you have never been on the other end of crime, but there are humans who are animals.

[pc2g4d]

"not everybody in jail deserves humane treatment"

Maybe this attitude is part of why they're in jail in the first place.

[banned1]

So you are saying that my ATTITUDE made THEM rape or stab or kill someone?

[nate_meurer]

I don't think anyone's really arguing that records of violent criminals should be hidden, turning all hiring decisions into games of roulette.

I'm guessing that you're capable of sensible, fair evaluation of a criminal record, and making an accordingly sensible hiring decision.

The problem is that most others are not. Most companies have a blanket ban on felons, even for things that should not be crimes. Remember that it used to be illegal to possess alcohol, or to marry someone outside your race, for example.

Thus, if you value the information that allows you to filter genuinely dangerous individuals from your life and business, then it seems that it would be in your interest for the system that provides such information be robust against injustice and abuse.

[banned1]

Thank you for your very reasonable answer.

[tyingq]

Was with you up until ”not everybody in jail deserves humane treatment”

[banned1]

Sorry, I believe some crimes deserve death.

[tyingq]

Well, for those crimes that result in life sentences or the death penalty, background checks don't really come into play.

There's a wide range of felonies that don't automatically make someone an animal.

[fortythirteen]

So the fifty year old that got picked up for weed in 1982 doesn't deserve to find anything more than the most menial job?

[adventured]

The parent didn't actually say that.

They said that it should be up to them, as to whether they hire that person after a background check eg reveals something.

There are very obvious cases where it makes a lot of sense to screen people based on background checks (eg a daycare or school). Further to that point, every business operator is different and has different beliefs. One operator might be ok with hiring a previously convicted rapist. The next business owner might be a woman who was raped in the past and has a very different view on that for good reason.

[banned1]

Whether the inmate deserves or not whatever you think she deserves is irrelevant to the issue that I am the one supposed to provide such thing. Why do I have to be the provider? Why don’t YOU do that if you so much believe in that? Why don’t YOU start a business and hire all felons?