Only In San Fran.

[ponch]

Originally Posted by canedriver

First it is not true that if 2 people are up for a position the protected class gets it automatically. Thats a bit of a stretch. The protected class will get it if not getting it shows discrimination. ie, minorites not represented in the workplace.

This stops the good ol boys clubs. While it does have its draw backs that protection is there for a reason.

So what do you want done with people who cant get housing because of a criminal record? Lets hear your suggestions. Remember your against any kind of social programs and you cant just leave them on a street, it depreciates mr and mrs smiths house.

Good old boys club? Obviously you've never had to deal with the velvet mafia. It's basic sociology. The difference is, you would rather engineer an outcome that flies in the face of human nature and even evolution. People act in their best interests when left alone. It works well. Lastly, housing isn't a natural right. Neither is a job.

[cactusjack]

This is a touchy subject for me. One of my sons is an ex-felon. When he was 18, he and a buddy got all lickered up one night and damaged some parked cars. Someone got the license plate # of the vehicle they were in and the cops showed up at 5:00 AM to speak to my son. I went and woke him up and the next thing I knew he was headed down the street in the back of a Gilbert PD squad car. The cops wouldn't tell me anything. He and his buddy had to pay thousands in restitution and my son was on probation for 3 years.

This was really his only run-in with the law. A night of drinking and poor judgment and he is branded an ex-felon for life. I certainly didn't condone or excuse what he did, but he paid his debt as ordered by the court. Should he be prevented from renting an apartment or getting a job because of this one night of stupidity? Admittedly, he didn't serve time other than the day in the Maricopa County Madison Street jail from the time of his arrest until he was arraigned later in the evening.

For the record, he is recently married and does have a good career and has grown up into a fine adult. But for just one night, he did something stupid and as a result he can't vote or own a firearm unless he gets his rights restored by a judge which I am urging him to do.

[canedriver]

So again I ask what are their options? Criminals have the right to earn a living. To earn a living you have to be able to shower and do laundry. Would you have them living next to a river to bathe and to do laundry?

Obviously in that city there is a problem with people finding housing who have a past. What happened to once your time is served your debt to society is done. Your creating a new class of lower economic citizens who in your opinion are entitled to basic human rights, and yes shelter is one of them.

Human rights are the minimum conditions for life in community. Human rights include not only civil and political rights but also economic rights.... This means that when people are without a chance to earn a living, and must go hungry and homeless, they are being denied basic rights. Society must ensure that these rights are protected.

While the above refers to the right to earn a living it it is directly tied to the right of shelter.





Again what would you do?

[ponch]

Originally Posted by cactusjack

This is a touchy subject for me. One of my sons is an ex-felon. When he was 18, he and a buddy got all lickered up one night and damaged some parked cars. Someone got the license plate # of the vehicle they were in and the cops showed up at 5:00 AM to speak to my son. I went and woke him up and the next thing I knew he was headed down the street in the back of a Gilbert PD squad car. The cops wouldn't tell me anything. He and his buddy had to pay thousands in restitution and my son was on probation for 3 years.

This was really his only run-in with the law. A night of drinking and poor judgment and he is branded an ex-felon for life. I certainly didn't condone or excuse what he did, but he paid his debt as ordered by the court. Should he be prevented from renting an apartment or getting a job because of this one night of stupidity? Admittedly, he didn't serve time other than the day in the Maricopa County Madison Street jail from the time of his arrest until he was arraigned later in the evening.

For the record, he is recently married and does have a good career and has grown up into a fine adult. But for just one night, he did something stupid and as a result he can't vote or own a firearm unless he gets his rights restored by a judge which I am urging him to do.

Well, I wish he had a better lawyer. That said, show how he should have guarantees/rights above anyone else? You or I could be denied an apartment or job because we are fat f's and that would be ok, but because he is an ex-con, he has protection. It makes no sense. That's the problem with protected classes, affirmative action etc. It's not about equal rights in the end, but extending special rights to certain people. Picking winners and losers. It's the same mentality that thinks it's ok to tax people at different rates because they make too much money or not much. So there we punish excellence. I am glad your son cleaned up his act and I hope he gets his record fixed. If that is the case, then it is demonstrable to anyone where it may matter.

[canedriver]

Jack, Those are the ones I am talking about.

His debt to society is paid in the form of restitution, probation etc. Why should he be penalized even more when he is a productive law abiding member of society.

We all know someone with a past with the same kind of story yet some people are willing to keep pushing them down the socio-economic ladder because of a night or moment of bad judgement.

its easy to say find someone who doesn't do background checks or move farther from the city into the country. Now your adding a financial burden on top because of longer commutes. In the case of no background checks, the only type of landlord I know of that doesn't do these is a slum lord or one making a quick buck while under foreclosure proceedings. Have fun living in that neighborhood.

My brother dealt with a legal nightmare with an ex. Felony failure to pay child support.

Does this mean he cant get basic housing?

Little background. He paid child support for 5 straight years and never missed a payment and always kept full insurance on his 2 girls. One slip out of the back of a truck and he was out of work for almost 4 years recovering.

This severely effected him in his occupation (truckdriver OTR) as he couldn't deliver into Canada. He lost his job over it. Until I got big enough to hire him on he was stuck in lower paying jobs because of that arrest.

He has since had his rights restored but it wasn't an easy or cheap thing to do.

God forbid he wasn't able to find a place to live.

[cactusjack]

Originally Posted by ponch

Well, I wish he had a better lawyer. That said, show how he should have guarantees/rights above anyone else? You or I could be denied an apartment or job because we are fat f's and that would be ok, but because he is an ex-con, he has protection. It makes no sense. That's the problem with protected classes, affirmative action etc. It's not about equal rights in the end, but extending special rights to certain people. Picking winners and losers. It's the same mentality that thinks it's ok to tax people at different rates because they make too much money or not much. So there we punish excellence. I am glad your son cleaned up his act and I hope he gets his record fixed. If that is the case, then it is demonstrable to anyone where it may matter.

No, I don't think he should have more or better rights than anyone else. The point I was trying to make was that he was young, did something totally stupid, and because of that he is now an ex-felon. Even though this happened nearly 10 years ago and he saw that as a wake up call to clean up his act. I guess my point was that many ex-felons aren't necessarily bad people. Which goes back to my original post that a lot of ex-felons are ex-felons because they got caught with weed or cocaine thanks to the failed "war on drugs".

They shouldn't make ex-felons a protected class because that is done at the expense of the rights of others. I just think some should have the same rights, not more of them, if that makes any sense.

[ponch]

Originally Posted by cactusjack

No, I don't think he should have more or better rights than anyone else. The point I was trying to make was that he was young, did something totally stupid, and because of that he is now an ex-felon. Even though this happened nearly 10 years ago and he saw that as a wake up call to clean up his act. I guess my point was that many ex-felons aren't necessarily bad people. Which goes back to my original post that a lot of ex-felons are ex-felons because they got caught with weed or cocaine thanks to the failed "war on drugs".

They shouldn't make ex-felons a protected class because that is done at the expense of the rights of others. I just think some should have the same rights, not more of them, if that makes any sense.

If that's true than let things be. As a protected class, people in such classes can sue. You or I for the example I made above could not. So, no one is saying he can't rent an apartment, only that the renter has a say in who gets it and who does not. Ultimately, the property owner loses the right to discriminate based on his or her own prejudices. We all do, whether it's ex-con's, fat f's, people with psychedelic colored hair or motorcycles. Is there higher justice in saying someone of a certain class is protected or that people can live according to their will limited only by the equal rights of others? Again, no one says he or she cannot get an apartment. If there was such a law, then we'd have a case. How big does the pool of protected classed get? Who are we missing? Who gets to decide? In some ways it's no different or better than jim crow because it limits people's rights. The best laws limit the government's power.

[canedriver]

Ponch I understand your fear over giving protections to people. However there is a vast difference between people with psychedelic colored hair, motor cycles, and fat f's.

You can change your hair color, ride public transportation or lose weight. You cannot just change your past. It isnt easy or cheap.

Get an apartment is NOT the answer. Go find an apartment complex here in Tampa that accepts felons? There isnt one short of public housing and the ghetto.

So you have someone who can pay there way and is willing to but they need a place to stay. Nobody short of a slum lord will rent to them. This is what I meant by creating a new tier of lower class citizen.

There isn't an easy answer, but keeping someone down when they want to better their life isnt the answer. Hell we just had a guy in america rob a bank for $1 just to get healthcare. Now imagine the guy trying to support himself or his kids and gets desperate. Right back to a life of crime.

What would you do still hasn't been answered. Am I to assume you don't think people have a right to live under a roof in america?

The following is a from a neighbor.

Lack of housing is one of the reasons Americas prisons have a revolving door. That is a fact. Go talk to a Parole officer. My next door neighbor is one and is reading this thread with me.

He says Americas problem is "not in my back yard". We want our garbage taken to the landfill but we don't want the landfill in our backyard.

We want the parks and recreation areas for our kids but not in our backyard, to noisy, to much traffic etc

We want criminals kept under lock and key but don't want to pay for the prisons. When we finally get funding for more or bigger prisons again its not in our backyard.

We appropriate money to social programs like halfway houses but don't put those halfway houses in our backyard.

We don't want to see homeless but we don't want shelters in our backyard.

He also brings up a good point with section 8 housing. You cant even get into that as a felon. Part of probation is having a verified place to live. Cant find a place to live and its a violation. See the revolving door problem.

[usranger74]

Originally Posted by cane driver

First it is not true that if 2 people are up for a position the protected class gets it automatically. Thats a bit of a stretch. The protected class will get it if not getting it shows discrimination. IE, minorities not represented in the workplace.

This stops the good IL boys clubs. While it does have its draw backs that protection is there for a reason.

So what do you want done with people who cant get housing because of a criminal record? Lets hear your suggestions. Remember your against any kind of social programs and you cant just leave them on a street, it depreciates Mr and Mrs smiths house.

We live in different world. In the world I have lived in and worked in for 40 yrs, the "protected class" always has the advantage (did not say they always "win").

I go back to the this simple fact, to create a "protected class" you have to do it on the backs of those not protected. You call them "good o' boys". I call them the the real "victims'.

Now, pals don't put words in my mouth. I did not say nor have I ever said I am against all social programs. Safe to say, I do believe in many.

How would I fix this "problem"? Frankly, as stated before, I don't think non-violent x-con have any more problem finding housing that anyone else in their income range.

What I would not do, is give them any advantage over those who choose not to commit crimes. It would appear that your social engineering solution is to discriminate against those who did not commit crimes which I care not to do.

[canedriver]

Originally Posted by usranger74

We live in different world. In the world I have lived in and worked in for 40 yrs, the "protected class" always has the advantage (did not say they always "win").

I go back to the this simple fact, to create a "protected class" you have to do it on the backs of those not protected. You call them "good o' boys". I call them the the real "victims'.

Now, pals don't put words in my mouth. I did not say nor have I ever said I am against all social programs. Safe to say, I do believe in many.

How would I fix this "problem"? Frankly, as stated before, I don't think non-violent x-con have any more problem finding housing that anyone else in their income range.

What I would not do, is give them any advantage over those who choose not to commit crimes. It would appear that your social engineering solution is to discriminate against those who did not commit crimes which I care not to do.

Is that the same world that women or minorities wouldn't hold jobs beyond entry level?

Do this, Go to your local apartment complex and fill out an application but mark that your convicted of a non violent felony. Bet you don't get the apartment.

How is it an advantage to ask for a fair review of the application? This is the fundamental idea behind Americans with disabilities act. I was hesitant to use this as an example because your easy response would be to say its not a disability and it doesn't apply. It isn't what I meant.

Show me a city operating at a 0% vacancy rate. Now tell me again why people cant rent available apartments because they have a non violent felony. That is what this law would help.

Prisons are operate on a revolving door. Surely you cant think the criminal recommits crime just for the hell of it. We do not have a program in place that integrates criminals back into society. Partly due to the not in our backyard mentality.

I am curious how it gives them protected status. It doesn't give women, minorities, disabled, or older people protected status. What it does give them is a fair shake at life.

People are for the economy this can only help it. Place to live, helps you in a job search, getting a job helps pay taxes and removes you from welfare. It's a win win situation.

I will leave you with this.

“This year, some 600,000 inmates will be released from prison back into society. We know from long experience that if they can’t find work, or a home, or help, they are much more likely to commit more crimes and return to prison…. America is the land of the second chance, and when the gates of the prison open, the path ahead should lead to a better life.”

--President George W. Bush, 2004 State of the Union Address

[usranger74]

Originally Posted by canedriver

Is that the same world that women or minorities wouldn't hold jobs beyond entry level?

Do this, Go to your local apartment complex and fill out an application but mark that your convicted of a non violent felony. Bet you don't get the apartment.

I would have no problem (see Econ 101) as there is a glut of rentals here. If I can pay for it, I will get it.

How is it an advantage to ask for a fair review of the application? This is the fundamental idea behind Americans with disabilities act. I was hesitant to use this as an example because your easy response would be to say its not a disability and it doesn't apply. It isn't what I meant.

Show me a city operating at a 0% vacancy rate. Now tell me again why people cant rent available apartments because they have a non violent felony. That is what this law would help.

Prisons are operate on a revolving door. Surely you cant think the criminal recommits crime just for the hell of it. We do not have a program in place that integrates criminals back into society. Partly due to the not in our backyard mentality.

I am curious how it gives them protected status. It doesn't give women, minorities, disabled, or older people protected status. What it does give them is a fair shake at life.

People are for the economy this can only help it. Place to live, helps you in a job search, getting a job helps pay taxes and removes you from welfare. It's a win win situation.

Once again, I doubt that non-violent x-cons have a problem finding housing. If they do in SF, may be they should move!!

Now, what is fair?? Bottom line, the law we are addressing here can only help x cons by discriminating against non-x cons. That is a fact you seem to have a hard time living with but non-the-less it is a fact. You think that to discriminate against those who did not commit a crime to help those who did is a good thing to do and fair. I don't hold that view. However, I do acknowledge that I would rather ride my Nomad that argue with a flaming liberal.

[ponch]

Originally Posted by usranger74

However, I do acknowledge that I would rather ride my Nomad that argue with a flaming liberal.

What about riding a BMW? I'll lend you mine. :)

[canedriver]

LOL i still fail to see how it is discriminating against people without a record. I think this is a case of "if a government official thought of it, it must be bad"

Damn i am such a liberal I guess when I go to the redwoods rally I will have found nirvana when I cross the state line into California

This is where we agree to disagree and enjoy the ride ;)

[Dave]

Originally Posted by canedriver

Your creating a new class of lower

I would say the person doing the crime voluntarily put themselves in the lower class. We ( the collective) did not create this. The convict did. "They" made the choice.

[usranger74]

Originally Posted by cactusjack

No, I don't think he should have more or better rights than anyone else. The point I was trying to make was that he was young, did something totally stupid, and because of that he is now an ex-felon. Even though this happened nearly 10 years ago and he saw that as a wake up call to clean up his act. I guess my point was that many ex-felons aren't necessarily bad people. Which goes back to my original post that a lot of ex-felons are ex-felons because they got caught with weed or cocaine thanks to the failed "war on drugs".

They shouldn't make ex-felons a protected class because that is done at the expense of the rights of others. I just think some should have the same rights, not more of them, if that makes any sense.

Scott - I have no disagreement with what you are saying, for several reasons.

1) I doubt that in most areas a non-violent x con will have a lot of problems competing for housing with folks in his/her same income bracket. Let's take your area for example. If it is like Omaha, there is a glut of rentals on the market. Very few slumlords are going to let a unit sit empty because they will not rent to a guy who sold some MAJ 10 yrs ago. Or a stock broker who sold bad bonds. Or a used car salesman who jacked up odometers. Or a tax cheat who got caught. If the x-con can pay rent, he will be able to get a unit. As such, I don't see a real need for social engineering this issue.

2) you are 100 % correct about the failed war on drugs - let's legalize some (much??) of that and tax the hell out of it and save space in our prisons for really bad folks.

However, I also realize this issue like many social issues has the ability to grow. Last spring while working in NC, the County I was working in was being pressured by the NAACP to make X cons a "protected class"for the purpose of hiring. Soo, much of my concern here is, this all needs to be "nipped in the bud" (no pun intended);)