Unless you are pardoned, the conviction is on your record for life. This record is public. Make of that what you will.
What exactly does it say on someone's record? Let's say I open a store and someone comes in who wants to be hired. I guess I pay some service to run a background check. Do they tell me the exact circumstances of the convictions? Does it give enough information to make an informed decision? If it just says "felon" that doesn't help me. Maybe I'd be willing to hire one kind of felon, but not another.
Also, with the sex offender thing, there is a difference between making information available to those who seek it, and explicitly pushing the information out to the world. There's also a difference in how the information is made available. With the sex offender thing, I can search by geographic area. With other things, I can only search by individual human being. That might seem like a small difference, but it is very significant.
I think there is a distinction between having a record of your crime and having said record affect your life legally after you have served your time and finished parole/probation.
So you are against the right of a private landowner to decide who can live on his land? You're against the right of a private employer to decide whom to hire? (Other than for reasons of race, sexual orientation, etc.) Interesting. I think Zimbabwe experimented with something this.
I don't think anyone's arguing that. However, prison is intended to be a system by which criminals can be reformed and placed back into society. If everybody wants to know if they live near a sex offender because that person may commit a crime again, then maybe, just maybe, there's something wrong with the reform system. Maybe.
I'm talking about laws which prevent people from acquiring land or traveling or living near certain areas.
Nobody in this thread has mentioned laws of this type. We are talking about a private homeowners association.
As for a sex offender registry, it's just that - a registry. It does not proscribe where someone can live, where they can work, etc. It's just a list of names and convictions. No more no less.
At the risk of going moderately off-topic, can someone explain to me how a homeowner's association is even legal? Where does an HOA's authority come from?
edit: Looked it up. The real-estate developer creates the association before subdividing and selling off the properties. The ownership of the association is then transferred to the buyers of the properties, and the requirement to obey the rules of the HOA is part of the deed to the properties.
I understand how that works legally now, but it's still bullshit.
Sadly they seem to be, which is why I flatly refuse to live under one.
Which is your right in this great country of ours. Other people, however, choose to (like me). Scott, if you don't want the life-long stigma of being a felon, don't commit a felony. You're the one who is always saying that you protect your internet reputation by not saying anything you regret. Life is the same way. If you can't do the time, don't do the crime.
Which is your right in this great country of ours. Other people, however, choose to (like me). Scott, if you don't want the life-long stigma of being a felon, don't commit a felony. You're the one who is always saying that you protect your internet reputation by not saying anything you regret. Life is the same way. If you can't do the time, don't do the crime.
I don't think that the issue is that these people have their crimes marked on their records, but rather that they never become full citizens, even after they have served their punishment. Are we trying to forever punish these people or help them become upstanding citizens? If it's the later, how can you do this if you permanently prevent them from exercising their rights?
Which is your right in this great country of ours. Other people, however, choose to (like me). Scott, if you don't want the life-long stigma of being a felon, don't commit a felony. You're the one who is always saying that you protect your internet reputation by not saying anything you regret. Life is the same way. If you can't do the time, don't do the crime.
Even if you do the crime, once you serve your time, you should be allowed a second chance to live a normal life. If you're going to keep things as is, you might as well just give everyone a life sentence or a death sentence. Don't lie and pretend the goal is rehabilitation. Sure, rehabilitation is possible, and it happens, but the system doesn't make it easy. It works against rehabilitation every step of the way.
Other people, however, choose to (like me).
Why do you live with an HOA? Don't they make all kinds of rules telling you what you can and can not do on your own property? What benefit do you get in return for letting a bunch of little old ladies tell you what to do?
I think that if someone rapes someone, they can't make the fact that they did that go away. They may have changed, but there is nothing untrue in saying that in the past they committed this crime.
I think that if someone rapes someone, they can't make the fact that they did that go away. They may have changed, but there is nothing untrue in saying that in the past they committed this crime.
The same can be said for a murderer. We make the information available for both. However, if someone is a rapist, we advertise that fact. If someone is a murderer, it is not advertised. If you want to find out someone is a murderer who has since cleaned up you have to do a background check on them specifically. You can't type in your zip code and get a map of murderers, AFAIK. If you want to search for a specific person, you should be able to find out their criminal record, as that should be public information. Forcing people to wear their criminal record on their proverbial sleeve is another story.
how can you do this if you permanently prevent them from exercising their rights?
What rights does the sex-offender registry prevent you from exercising? People keep forgetting that it does not create anything new. It just enhances the ability of the public to monitor what their government has been up to.
Even if you do the crime, once you serve your time, you should be allowed a second chance to live a normal life.
See my above rant about how myopic a viewpoint this is. Treatment is every bit as important as punishment. You are directly correlating the two, which is a big mistake.
No, Scott, the stigma is part of the punishment. Just because you're not in jail does not mean the punishment ends. That's the way it is.
Now, HOAs get their power from deed restrictions which run with the land. When you set up a development with an HOA, you agree to these restrictions when you buy the house. If you don't like them, don't buy the house. If you think your HOA is out of control, run for a board position. I did. Now I'm treasurer. Lucky me. It's a lot of work but at least I have a voice.
See my above rant about how myopic a viewpoint this is. Treatment is every bit as important as punishment. You are directly correlating the two, which is a big mistake.
How is being forced to advertise your past crimes a treatment as opposed to a punishment? How is forcing someone to live out in the world, but making it almost impossible to get a decent job, a treatment as opposed to a punishment? Treatment is helping someone find a job and a home, not making it harder.
What rights does the sex-offender registry prevent you from exercising? People keep forgetting that it does not create anything new. It just enhances the ability of the public to monitor what their government has been up to.
I'm sorry, did I ever say that the registry is preventing people from exercising rights? Did I say I was completely against it? No, stop putting words in my mouth.
How is being forced to advertise your past crimes a treatment as opposed to a punishment?
I didn't say that it was treatment. I said that I support the right of citizens to have easy access to public records. I said that I support the individual rights of employers and landowners to decide who they will hire and rent to.
For the fiftieth time... the sex-offender registry is merely a tool to use to obtain information that is already public. It is no more and no less.
Now, HOAs get their power from deed restrictions which run with the land. When you set up a development with an HOA, you agree to these restrictions when you buy the house. If you don't like them, don't buy the house. If you think your HOA is out of control, run for a board position. I did. Now I'm treasurer. Lucky me. It's a lot of work but at least I have a voice.
What if the HOA is all good, but then they vote something you don't like. Your only option is to sell your house and move?
Also, you might be able to be treasurer of an HOA being a fancy lawyer. I leave the house early in the morning and get home late. That makes it almost impossible for me to have any voice in the HOA. Most HOAs out thisaway are run almost entirely by homemakers and retired people. The rules they make often abandon all reason, but are based on a justification of increasing property values. Read Fark, and you will constantly see stories about HOAs making the wildest rules. One HOA banned clotheslines. Another HOA didn't allow anyone to have a car older than five years old. Because I live in a certain house some old ladies are governing my car buying decisions?
I'm sure that not all HOAs are like this. If you are the treasurer of yours, you've probably got it under control. However, the very idea that someone else can put more restrictions on my life than the actual government, with less representation, makes me nauseous.
I'm sorry, did I ever say that the registry is preventing people from exercising rights? Did I say it was a bad thing? No, stop putting words in my mouth.
Perhaps I misunderstood the following comment you made:
I don't think that the issue is that these people have their crimes marked on their records, but rather that they never become full citizens, even after they have served their punishment. Are we trying to forever punish these people or help them become upstanding citizens? If it's the later, how can you do this if you permanently prevent them from exercising their rights?
For the fiftieth time... the sex-offender registry is merely a tool to use to obtain information that is already public. It is no more and no less.
Would you be in favor of requiring public notice for other types of felons or criminals? I think there is a distinction to be made between allowing access to public knowledge and a system which seems like public shaming.
I think Thaed's point is that a HOA works for some people. It doesn't work for some others. The beautiful thing about this country is that you get to choose if you want a HOA. Choices are nice.
For the fiftieth time... the sex-offender registry is merely a tool to use to obtain information that is already public. It is no more and no less.
I'm not disagreeing with you that the public information should not be made available. What I'm arguing is the unfairness of having different levels of availability for different public information. If it was a criminal registry, that would be fine. But to have a registry of sex offenders specifically, yet not one of murderers, is clearly wrong. Also, there is a difference between making information available and actively disseminating the information. Sex offenders with colored license plates? Sorry to Godwin it, but Jews with Stars of David.
@Thaed - Can you leave the HOA? Does the HOA gain some sort of interest in your property upon joining said HOA?
An HOA's rights are attached to your property. The laws vary from state to state, but essentially the residents have to vote to make significant changes to the deed restrictions. The residents of an HOA could vote to terminate the HOA. The existing deed restrictions are not the problem. If you don't read them when you buy the house, that's you're own tough luck. It is what an aggressive HOA can do going forward with a majority vote that can engender displeasure. Thus, if you decide to move to such a development, you have to be vigilant. It's a democracy.
Perhaps I misunderstood the following comment you made:
I was addressing restrictions preventing convicted sex offenders from living near highly populated areas or near schools. I was addressing issues such as requiring them to have pink license plates. Maybe you shouldn't assume so much when you debate.
Would you be in favor of requiring public notice for other types of felons or criminals?
I'm not quite sure what you mean by "requiring public notice."
I am in favor of requiring government to grant citizens access to public records. In my state, it's relatively easy to look up any court record via the internet - for any crime, divorce, etc. That's the way it should be.
I'm not talking about "public notice." I'm talking about the public's access to public records.
Democracy is a system of government by which political sovereignty is retained by the people and either exercised directly by citizens or through their elected representatives.
It is what an aggressive HOA can do going forward with a majority vote that can engender displeasure.
By majority you mean 51%?
How are votes distributed in your HOA? Is it one per property?
My dad has places in Florida and in MA that have a board to take care of stuff. Both places are over 55 communities. He used to be on the boards but found it to be too much work and stopped. In his case each piece of property has one vote and the developer has a special ballot that they use to vote as well as restrictions on how many votes the developer can put to any one candidate.
Unlike Scott's situation almost everyone in these two communities is retired and has no problem being involved.
Comments
Also, with the sex offender thing, there is a difference between making information available to those who seek it, and explicitly pushing the information out to the world. There's also a difference in how the information is made available. With the sex offender thing, I can search by geographic area. With other things, I can only search by individual human being. That might seem like a small difference, but it is very significant.
As for a sex offender registry, it's just that - a registry. It does not proscribe where someone can live, where they can work, etc. It's just a list of names and convictions. No more no less.
edit: Looked it up. The real-estate developer creates the association before subdividing and selling off the properties. The ownership of the association is then transferred to the buyers of the properties, and the requirement to obey the rules of the HOA is part of the deed to the properties.
I understand how that works legally now, but it's still bullshit.
Now, HOAs get their power from deed restrictions which run with the land. When you set up a development with an HOA, you agree to these restrictions when you buy the house. If you don't like them, don't buy the house. If you think your HOA is out of control, run for a board position. I did. Now I'm treasurer. Lucky me. It's a lot of work but at least I have a voice.
For the fiftieth time... the sex-offender registry is merely a tool to use to obtain information that is already public. It is no more and no less.
Also, you might be able to be treasurer of an HOA being a fancy lawyer. I leave the house early in the morning and get home late. That makes it almost impossible for me to have any voice in the HOA. Most HOAs out thisaway are run almost entirely by homemakers and retired people. The rules they make often abandon all reason, but are based on a justification of increasing property values. Read Fark, and you will constantly see stories about HOAs making the wildest rules. One HOA banned clotheslines. Another HOA didn't allow anyone to have a car older than five years old. Because I live in a certain house some old ladies are governing my car buying decisions?
I'm sure that not all HOAs are like this. If you are the treasurer of yours, you've probably got it under control. However, the very idea that someone else can put more restrictions on my life than the actual government, with less representation, makes me nauseous.
I am in favor of requiring government to grant citizens access to public records. In my state, it's relatively easy to look up any court record via the internet - for any crime, divorce, etc. That's the way it should be.
I'm not talking about "public notice." I'm talking about the public's access to public records.
Did you know that in some states felons cannot vote?
How are votes distributed in your HOA? Is it one per property?
My dad has places in Florida and in MA that have a board to take care of stuff. Both places are over 55 communities. He used to be on the boards but found it to be too much work and stopped. In his case each piece of property has one vote and the developer has a special ballot that they use to vote as well as restrictions on how many votes the developer can put to any one candidate.
Unlike Scott's situation almost everyone in these two communities is retired and has no problem being involved.