Ah yes, rewrite history to not offend, what got us here in the first place
What are you referring to and how did that 'get us here'?
US newspapers are deleting old crime stories, offering subjects a 'clean slate'
131–140 of 390 posts
Re: US newspapers are deleting old crime stories, offering subjects a 'clean slate'
#132Earlier quoted context omitted.
What would happen to people’s perception of crime if only the crime perpetuated by the rich and powerful was reported on?
It's probably just me, but it feels like reporting on crime is very lopsided and slanted against the powerless.
I only hear about poor people committing crimes usually on the local news.
Everything else is billionaire did this, politician did that, corporation did both of those and more.
Re: US newspapers are deleting old crime stories, offering subjects a 'clean slate'
#133There's a lot of research on ban-the-box policies[1]. I assume this applies here as well. [1]: https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=ban+the+box
This doesn't work well. It results in additional discrimination. The state of the art is, as I understand it, "Fair Chance employment", where the employer explicitly agrees to hire people with criminal records. We're well on our way to the majority of employers opting in, it's snowballed nicely. And it gives jobseekers a big red flag if the company doesn't have that policy.
Re: US newspapers are deleting old crime stories, offering subjects a 'clean slate'
#134Earlier quoted context omitted.
No just lots but almost all. 63% of violent offenders reoffend but that actually undercounts the amount of crimes that are caused by repeat offenders because there are some people offending 10+ times. A three strikes rule would eliminate nearly half of all violent crime because nearly half of violent crime is committed by people who have already been convicted of 3+ other violent crimes.
In the Seattle area there’s a huge trend of reoffending criminals performing larger crimes as time goes, because they face no real consequences. This is happening because activist judges, who typically run unopposed and don’t face consequences themselves, are releasing dangerous criminals back into the public. As a recent example, an activist judge released a teen who committed felony robbery back into the public, ag…
> there’s a huge trend of reoffending criminals performing larger crimes as time goes
Is there evidence of it? In my experience, people take a few incidents as ammunition for their reactionary attacks on 'activists'. But that doesn't mean it is or isn't happening.
Re: US newspapers are deleting old crime stories, offering subjects a 'clean slate'
#135I'm ok with this, as long as it's systemic. Otherwise it's just another way for people with means to get a leg up on people without means. If it's, "we delete all crime stories after N years", then fine, especially for low level, non violent stuff. The punishment for crimes should come from the justice system and people should be able to pay their dues and move on.
> especially for low level, non violent stuff This is codeword for financial, white collar crimes. So, it is definitely a policy serving the rich.
Shoplifting is low level, non violent, and very very common. The only shoplifting I've heard of by the rich is a famous actress who had a shoplifting fetish.
Re: US newspapers are deleting old crime stories, offering subjects a 'clean slate'
#136Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's probably just me, but it feels like reporting on crime is very lopsided and slanted against the powerless.
I only hear about poor people committing crimes usually on the local news. Everything else is billionaire did this, politician did that, corporation did both of those and more.
Sure, you don't read other places' local news. But those places' residents do.
Re: US newspapers are deleting old crime stories, offering subjects a 'clean slate'
#137[flagged]
Have you ever tried to find the things you said on a forum when you were a teenager?
Every time I do this, most of the stuff I did 20 years ago is outright gone, and it always ends in disappointment-- and I have material info on where and what it should be.
Re: US newspapers are deleting old crime stories, offering subjects a 'clean slate'
#138I understand this is the general policy in a few places, like Germany. The general idea seems to be that it is more beneficial to a society if criminals are given a viable avenue to lead non-criminal lives again, with the alternative being people going "ah fuck it, I guess I'm a criminal now". I'm surprised at this concept spreading in the US, since the system would generally benefit from having perpetual perpetrator…
> the prison slavery system. extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Where is the enslavement?
you seriously asking this or joking?????!
Re: US newspapers are deleting old crime stories, offering subjects a 'clean slate'
#139This could create an imbalance of power:
It could prevent the public from knowing of the past misdeeds of the powerful. It's much different to give someone with no power an opportunity to move forward, compared to removing an essential check on people who have power.
Also, it seems likely that powerful people will still have access to this data, in news databases, in the data accumulated in the profiles of marketing and surveillance companies, etc.
Re: US newspapers are deleting old crime stories, offering subjects a 'clean slate'
#140I understand this is the general policy in a few places, like Germany. The general idea seems to be that it is more beneficial to a society if criminals are given a viable avenue to lead non-criminal lives again, with the alternative being people going "ah fuck it, I guess I'm a criminal now". I'm surprised at this concept spreading in the US, since the system would generally benefit from having perpetual perpetrator…
There are private prisons in the US that benefit from more prisoners. But there are many more people and organizations there that benefit from fewer prisoners. For most purposes, a country is not a singular thing.
I suspect that is true but here is the difference: organizations that benefit from fewer prisons have a multitude of other things they benefit from (and can lobby for). Private prison operators on the other hand really only have one thing that can improve their bottom line at the end of the day - more prisons.
Outside of a few non-profit orgs I suspect there aren't a lot of dollars lobbying for fewer prisons, it's not a great look and it's easily to spin as "company X doesn't want to lock up violent criminals!
On the other hand that's really the only agenda item private prison operators put their lobbying dollars toward.