We have all heard the hype over Bush's controversial illegal alien amnesty bill. It's drawn criticism from both the right and left.
What about non-violent first offender bill? Upon completion of sentence, non-violent offenders can apply for a full expungement. This will provide a decent chance for a productive life, and reduce chance of returning to prison.
Of course, it would apply only to non-violent offenders. Nobody wants child molesters, murderers, rapist, etc access to this. But I see no problem allowing ano-violent offenders a second chance.
Thoughts anyone?
Amnesty for Non-Violent First Offenders
Printable View
-
10-05-2007, 08:28 PMblueeagleAmnesty for Non-Violent First Offenders
-
10-05-2007, 09:48 PMdeadlockRe: Amnesty for non-violent first offenders?
So you mean the person is actually convicted and given a sentance, pays their debt and released from the sentancing?
At the time of release they then are completely free of all record of this legal process?
Isn't that the way it is supposed to be?
Why should we expect anything other than just that? They paid. It's over.
It's the internal struggle of reintroduction to society where the breakdown occurs. There's a loss of time while experiencing restricted rights and privileges. -
10-05-2007, 10:04 PMblueeagleRe: Amnesty for non-violent first offenders?Yes, once they pay their time, they deserve a second chance. Some exceptions apply, of course.Quote:
Quoting deadlock
This will help create a skilled work force, safe tax payers money, lower crime (those with a job are less likely to commit crime), reduce incarceration rates, possible even reduce HIV infections. Not to mention being the right thing to do.
In 2002 President Bush said, "America is the land of second chance". After making that speech, a huge crowd, mostly comprised of the Christian right, erupted in cheer. Mr President, actions speak louder then words.
I for one would MUCH rather see our CITIZENS receive amnesty, then some illegal alien. -
10-05-2007, 10:16 PMdanielpalosRe: Amnesty for non-violent first offenders?I think the person should be considered to have paid the debt to society, in full, when they finish their sentence.Quote:
Quoting blueeagle
It should not matter to the private sector, as long as the debt was paid. In other words, the private sector shouldn't need to ask about criminal background, for employment purposes.
Consider a scenario in banking. It should not matter to the bank if a prospective employee was previously convicted of any infractions of fiduciary responsibilities.
It should only matter to the justice department for appropriate decision making, for repeat offenses. Especially, for at-will employment. -
10-05-2007, 10:22 PMblueeagleRe: Amnesty for non-violent first offenders?
Dan, thank you for staying on topic. There may be hope for you yet. :p
But really, I agree with you 100%. A persons PAST should have no effect on their future. If they wanna change their life, get a job, support their family, I see absolutely NO reason to deny them this opportunity.
Ex-cons who have trouble finding work have a good chance of returning to prison. I would rather see somebody working at the factory then breaking in my house... -
10-05-2007, 10:35 PMdeadlockRe: Amnesty for non-violent first offenders?:rolleyes:Quote:
Especially, for at-will employment.
Well, he just squeeked it in at the bottom. Doesn't count?:( -
10-05-2007, 10:43 PMblueeagleRe: Amnesty for non-violent first offenders?LMAO! I did not notice that!! Give him credit though. At least I under stood what he was saying. :pQuote:
Quoting deadlock
-
10-07-2007, 05:43 AMaaronRe: Amnesty for non-violent first offenders?
When I started practicing criminal defense, my assumption was that most young adults who were charged with a crime would benefit from a diversion program and a second chance. It didn't take long (or many calls to appear at probation violation hearings) before I recognize that is not universally true. Law-abiding citizens may not understand it, but there are people in our society who have a real problem going more than a few months without getting arrested for something. My favorite was the guy who got picked up for possession of marijuana (he and some friends were smoking in public) the night before his (deferred) sentencing on a felony charge.
I suspect that there will be a lot of first offenders who don't qualify for expungement under such an "amnesty", because by the time they complete their probation they will have had another incident which disqualifies them. (That's not a reason why such a program should not be offered, but I suspect the benefit would be more limited than you believe.) -
10-07-2007, 10:18 AMdanielpalosRe: Amnesty for non-violent first offenders
What about people who actually complete their sentence? Is there any real need for private employers to request any information regarding previous illegalities, if those have been paid for, in accordance with the "doctrine" of paying a debt to society?
In other words if an employer feels compelled to ask, what would be wrong with someone replying with "debt to society paid", or something to that effect? -
10-07-2007, 10:28 AMcdwjavaRe: Amnesty for non-violent first offenders
Most states - like mine - already have a process where a person can get a felony reduced or expunged - particularly if they did not serve any prison time (which is the case with many non-violent felonies out here such as drugs).
Unfortunately, past criminal conduct IS a great indicator of future criminal conduct. Rarely do we find serious offenders who do not have a lengthy history of police contacts and arrests. On a side note, the greatest single indicator seems to be a history of truancy and minor juvenile offenses ... one who has a number of truancy allegations combined with minor status offenses (curfew, cigarettes, even alcohol) as a juvenile is far more likely to engage in adult criminal behavior than one who has no such history.
- Carl -
10-07-2007, 10:36 AMseniorjudgeRe: Amnesty for non-violent first offenders
Okay, two things:
http://www.expertlaw.com/forums/show...t=32338&page=3
Daniel made a joke. It was funny. The guy might be learning something.
If we can just stop him from saying "at-will"!
Another thing nobody seems to notice: If a first offender gets a first offense expunged, then how are you going to tell if you really have a first offender or not the next time around?
No one ever seems to think that far in advance. -
10-07-2007, 11:42 AMjkRe: Amnesty for non-violent first offendersQuote:
danielpalos:
It should not matter to the private sector, as long as the debt was paid. In other words, the private sector shouldn't need to ask about criminal background, for employment purposes.
Quote:
David C. McCullough
History is a guide to navigation in perilous times. History is who we are and why we are the way we are.
Quote:
Quote:
what a person has done in the past is all too indicative of who he is today.
Better to be forewarned. -
10-07-2007, 11:45 AMseniorjudgeRe: Amnesty for non-violent first offenders
...
And here let me say that we cannot appreciate the present without a knowledge of the past if we hope to attain the future. Furthermore, the Russian proverb puts it best—“dwell on the past and you lose one eye, forget the past and you lose both eyes.” And indeed we have the affirmation of the immortal William Shakespeare—“What is past is prologue.”
....
http://www2.un.int/Countries/Grenada/1129976324.htm
And here we thought Danny was making progress! :wallbang: -
10-07-2007, 12:31 PMblueeagleRe: Amnesty for non-violent first offenders
@ Aaron. Some states do have deferred sentencing. But they are a joke. While it prevents conviction from showing up on record, the arrest will always be there. Most employers have no idea what a deferred sentence is anyway, and treat arrest as if they were convictions.
@ Carl. Sadly you're right. I think the biggest problem is the inability to find a decent job or a place to live. Some are forced to return to a life of crime. It's very sad we allow this to happen. -
10-07-2007, 12:39 PMblueeagleRe: Amnesty for non-violent first offendersOh come on, JK. Why should we deny a person who made one mistake a chance at a decent life? Why should his/her family have to suffer because he/she can't find decent employment?Quote:
Quoting jk
I'm not talking about sex offenders and murders here. I'm talking about first offenders who deserve a second chance. -
10-07-2007, 12:40 PMcdwjavaRe: Amnesty for non-violent first offenders
[QUOTE=blueeagle;135906@ Carl. Sadly you're right. I think the biggest problem is the inability to find a decent job or a place to live. Some are forced to return to a life of crime. It's very sad we allow this to happen.[/QUOTE]
Quite honestly, I have found that most of them CHOOSE to return to crime - they aren't "forced".
We have employers where I live that offer decent paying jobs to convicted felons, but almost invariably, the person either takes advantage of the employer or they screw themselves over by going back to their former ways.
For some, things may truly be tough. For most, they use simple hurdles as an excuse to fall back to that which they find easier than abiding by the rules - someone ELSE's rules.
- Carl -
10-07-2007, 12:42 PMcdwjavaRe: Amnesty for non-violent first offendersIf the offender had thought of their family in the first place, they would not have committed the offenses to begin with.Quote:
Quoting blueeagle
People overcome adversity every day. I think we all know people who overcome greater hurdles than a criminal record and have gone on to be happy, healthy, and productive. I personally know several felons that have done this as well! It's often a matter of determination and will.
- Carl -
10-07-2007, 12:53 PMblueeagleRe: Amnesty for non-violent first offendersCarl, studies shows ex-felons with a decent job are less likely to return to crime.Quote:
Quoting cdwjava
Some people will never chance, but this is not the case with everybody. Most of the time they make a error in judgment, and it ends up costing them their life.
Plus time chances everybody. People mature. Somebody who made a mistake when they were young isn't gonna be the same person 20 year later. You see what I'm getting at?
What if we were to focus more on criminal rehabilitation? Our probation system currently lacks the resources needed to actually help defendents lead a more productive life. Maybe the state should spend more money on rehabilitation programs? -
10-07-2007, 12:55 PMdeadlockRe: Amnesty for non-violent first offenders'But for the Grace of God, there go I.'Quote:
Quoting blueeagle
-
10-07-2007, 01:01 PMcdwjavaRe: Amnesty for non-violent first offendersI suppose it depends on what you call a "decent job". I often hear the excuse that there is no work when that is almost NEVER the case. Sure, there may not be a job that pays $20/hr. for someone with few skills, but that's life and not just an obstacle for the convicted. Many of these guys have skills I don't have, they just come up with a host of excuses why they can't succeed. Certainly that's not universal, but I hear it so often I sometimes want to puke! :eek:Quote:
Quoting blueeagle
And if they've changed, their life almost certainly has as well. Unless the person has been unemployed for 20 years, I doubt that old of a conviction is much of a problem any more unless he is changing careers - or trying.Quote:
Plus time chances everybody. People mature. Somebody who made a mistake when they were young isn't gonna be the same person 20 year later. You see what I'm getting at?
Rehab is fine. But! When it gets to the point that education and training are more readily available to the convicted than to the law-abiding, I have to draw the line!Quote:
What if we were to focus more on criminal rehabilitation? Our probation system currently lacks the resources needed to actually help defendents lead a more productive life.
I used to work in a jail. We had regulars who would return to custody for medical care or if they wanted to try and work towards a GED or even an AA/AS! They were able to access things for free that I could not! The inmate in the jail had access to medical care and specialists on 48 hours notice - I had to schedule appointments weeks ahead of time.
The same is true for many job training and counseling programs out here ... they are more readily accessible to the incarcerated than to the law-abiding. Where's the equity in that?
Maybe ... the question then comes, where do they get the money? And, do we just make these programs available to criminals?Quote:
Maybe the state should spend more money on rehabilitation programs?
- Carl -
10-07-2007, 01:03 PMblueeagleRe: Amnesty for non-violent first offendersCarl, please. People make stupid mistakes all the time where they're young. It's part of growing up. Almost everybody has done some thing illegal, whether it be running a stop sign, experimenting with cannabis, DWI, whatever. Most are just never caught. I bet even some police officers made dumb mistakes when they were young!Quote:
Quoting cdwjava
-
10-07-2007, 01:16 PMjkRe: Amnesty for non-violent first offendersAs I understand things, the prison system used to shoot to rehabilitate the convicts. I understand this has generally been seen as an impossible task and the intent of prison has merely become one of punishment ( as it originally began)Quote:
What if we were to focus more on criminal rehabilitation? Our probation system currently lacks the resources needed to actually help defendents lead a more productive life. Maybe the state should spend more money on rehabilitation programs?
A persons core values are generally determined very early in life and although they can be changed with great determination, they generally do not change.
I do not mean to infer that once a thief always a thief but I believe the temptation will always be there. I believe an employer (that must out trust in an employee to some degree, sometimes a great degree) has the right to know who they are hiring.
Now, one thing you might undertake is research to determine what states expunge convictions and the limitations of such. I do know there are some states that require all state possessed evidence of that crime (including arrest) to be sealed.
The problem comes with outside reporting agencies. That info will never disappear totally. Nothing can truly be done about that. -
10-07-2007, 01:18 PMdeadlockRe: Amnesty for non-violent first offenders
The rehabilitating work is done mostly by religious based programs. Not the government. The VA has had many programs residential rehabilitative, transitional and permanent available to vets. They also are very active in reaching out to provide assistance thru catchman efforts.
There are government committees formed to "look into" and make reccommendations about programs but they usually end up a white paper.
A report to the gov of Florida last year said 30-thousand people released from Florida prisons each year are back behind bars within three years.
There is punishment and then there is protecting society. First time offenders (of most offenses) are sentanced for punishment. -
10-07-2007, 01:22 PMcdwjavaRe: Amnesty for non-violent first offendersA mistake is one thing, a serious felony is another. A person learns from a mistake.Quote:
Quoting blueeagle
A felony is hardly "a mistake". Even if it were, people can and often DO recover from that one offense and do just fine. Where you see the problems is when the person has a history of such "mistakes" and does NOT learn from them.
In my 16 years at this job I have yet to ever see anyone do prison time for a non-violent felony on a first offense. Heck, the chances of doing even county time is somewhere between slim and none in most those cases! These first and even second offenders aren't the people that have problems - it's the guy that runs a string of "mistakes" and keeps going back that fails to move on. The convicted felon that is unemployed and embroiled in self pity tends to be the guy that keeps coming into contact with the authorities because they just don't learn. The guy that learned his lesson the first - or even the second - time out is not the guy with the problem because he bounces back and moves on.
None of those are felonies in my state.Quote:
It's part of growing up. Almost everybody has done some thing illegal, whether it be running a stop sign, experimenting with cannabis, DWI, whatever.
Sure they did. But, either the felony activity was never revealed in the background (and it often DOES come up if it was there at all) or they were never arrested or investigated. Yeah, sometimes luck plays a hand ... but, when you roll the dice sometimes they come up snake eyes.Quote:
Most are just never caught. I bet even some police officers made dumb mistakes when they were young!
- Carl -
10-07-2007, 01:32 PMjkRe: Amnesty for non-violent first offenderscould you put that into perspective? Any idea how many releasees there are per year?Quote:
=deadlock;135925]
A report to the gov of Florida last year said 30-thousand people released from Florida prisons each year are back behind bars within three years.
-
10-07-2007, 01:49 PMdeadlockRe: Amnesty for non-violent first offendersAnd they make them as adults as well just like the rest of the human race. :)Quote:
Quoting blueeagle
-
10-07-2007, 01:51 PMcdwjavaRe: Amnesty for non-violent first offenders
In California the highest recidivism category would seem to be for property crimes - 77% are rearrested with more than half being re-convicted.
Some two thirds of CA prison inmates are returned to prison within three years of their original release but more than 50% are sent back due to parole (technical) violations. This makes our rate perhaps the highest in the nation.
Even so, the decision to re-offend belongs to one person and one person only. As we move further away from individual responsibility we will find that no one can be accountable for their own actions as there will always be a finger to point at another.
Ah, for the days of embarrassment and shame. These were effective methods to control much deviant activity.
- Carl -
10-07-2007, 02:01 PMblueeagleRe: Amnesty for non-violent first offenders
JK, In Europe the rehabilitation rate is as high as 80% in some cases. Maybe our system is just broken?
Actually Carl, possession of cannabis is a felony where I live- if the person is caught within 1000 feet of a park. A lawyer told me this. -
10-07-2007, 02:10 PMjkRe: Amnesty for non-violent first offenderscould be.Quote:
Quoting blueeagle
After seeing Carls numbers, I see no reason to offer anybody any sort of amnesty. That is way to high to show that somebody made a mistake and has since changed their ways. -
10-07-2007, 02:10 PMdeadlockRe: Amnesty for non-violent first offenders
Carl,
There is no reentry or planned discharges from prisons. They literally go out on the street. Sometimes they go into a nursing home because they need medical care. They may or may not even have money to afford a place to sleep that same night.
They are obviously unprepared to handle their affairs and as a society we offer nothing.
It makes it difficult to respond when someone says that they "shouldn't have" when fact is known they were charged and sentanced and now released.
So far that attitude hasn't helped to address a problem for society. -
10-07-2007, 02:14 PMblueeagleRe: Amnesty for non-violent first offendersI have a DWI from when I was 17. But I have never had the urge to drink and drive since my arrest. Maybe some people do change??Quote:
Quoting jk
Carl's numbers are so high because ex-convicts have trouble finding employment. -
10-07-2007, 02:16 PMcdwjavaRe: Amnesty for non-violent first offendersThen someone in possession of cannabis would be a fool in your state.Quote:
Quoting blueeagle
Possessing marijuana is not an accident.
- Carl -
10-07-2007, 02:22 PMcdwjavaRe: Amnesty for non-violent first offendersOf course they do.Quote:
Quoting blueeagle
Hogwash.Quote:
Carl's numbers are so high because ex-convicts have trouble finding employment.
Employment may be an issue for some, but hardly most. If they have a hard time finding employment now, they had the same problem before. If they lacked skills the first time out, they lack them again. Yeah, they now have a strike of a conviction behind them, but as i said, for most people that one conviction is not a problem and it almost never results in prison time. Repeat offenders I have no sympathy for.
It's not for a lack of jobs, it's more often a lack of a desire. I hear it all the time from guys that get a decent job and then decide to blow it and then blame it on the boss and some sort of rules he just couldn't abide by. There are many jobs out there for people with a criminal record, and sometimes they might have to work their way up from flipping burgers to managing the store, but it CAN be done.
I talk to convicted criminals every day. I frequently ask them how things are going, adn I even hook them up with employment. Unfortunately, the average stay with a single employer for too many of these guys is about 2 or 3 months and then they fall back to their old ways, their old crowd, or their bad habits.
It's about character, not just about jobs. If it were about jobs, then the Great Depression would have been the most crime ridden era in history ... the fact was, it was not.
- Carl -
10-07-2007, 02:24 PMblueeagleRe: Amnesty for non-violent first offendersI have never used marijuana, but I know over 50% of Americans have. Those are the ones who will admit it. I bet the number is closer to 70%.Quote:
Quoting cdwjava
Carl, California recidivism rates are probably the highest in the WORLD.
http://www.lbb.state.tx.us/PubSafety...eport_2005.pdf
I'm not much of a fan of the Texas justice system, but this speaks volumes. Compare our 3 year recidivism rate (28%) to California's (62%). What are ya'll doing wrong over there? Guess thats what happens when you elected a movie star for governor. :p -
10-07-2007, 02:26 PMcdwjavaRe: Amnesty for non-violent first offendersThere are plans in place out here ... certainly they are weak and often poorly applied, but they do exist.Quote:
Quoting deadlock
Again the issue is money ... and will. Not too many people have sympathy for someone who has been to prison since these folks tend to have a few felony convictions under their belt before they even GET to prison (at least in CA). It takes time to get to prison here.
There are many that advocate warehousing as opposed to rehabilitation. I am not one of those, but it is frustrating when it becomes obvious that the rehab component does not work, or, it costs so much that other programs collapse to pay for it.Quote:
It makes it difficult to respond when someone says that they "shouldn't have" when fact is known they were charged and sentanced and now released.
- Carl -
10-07-2007, 02:29 PMcdwjavaRe: Amnesty for non-violent first offendersActually our recidivism rate may be slightly higher than 62%.Quote:
Quoting blueeagle
I'll bet part of the answer is that we release more people on parole than imany other states do. When on parole, there are conditions ... when the convict fails to adhere to the conditions, he goes back. I have to run so I don't have time to look it ujp, but how many of your state's felons are released on parole compared to ours? Almost ALL of ours are released with two to three years parole over their heads ... only a miniscule amount serve their entire time and leave clean.
Now, if we could fire up the death chambers like you guys do, that might have a deterrent effect!
As it is now, the killers of two friends of mine will likely die of old age before any death sentence can be carried out.
- Carl -
10-07-2007, 02:29 PMjkRe: Amnesty for non-violent first offendersI understand but the numbers tend to show that apparently most don;t.Quote:
Quoting blueeagle
I will tell you, I had a kid working for me that had an ankle bracelet on. I am not totally removed from hiring such a person. If they can convince me that they have changed, I don;t immeditely dismiss them due to the conviction.
I am sure I could find a few in my trade union with a criminal record that make a pretty fair living. I believe there is more to it than simply the conviction.
btw: would you have offered Ken Lay amnesty? I suspect that was his first criminal trial. Where would you put the line? -
10-07-2007, 02:32 PMblueeagleRe: Amnesty for non-violent first offendersHow come the poorer states have higher crime rates then the richer one? It's because of a lack of opportunity.Quote:
Quoting cdwjava
Although, I am baffled as to why the great depression did not have a large effect on the crime rate. Maybe the cost of living wasn't so high back then? -
10-07-2007, 02:36 PMblueeagleRe: Amnesty for non-violent first offendersCapital punishment does not reduce crime. Again, look at Europe...Quote:
Quoting cdwjava
Plus, I oppose amnesty for violent offenders. I support it for non-violent offenders ONLY. -
10-07-2007, 02:39 PMaaronRe: Amnesty for non-violent first offenders
What crime statistics are you referencing?