G
Catholics for the abolishment of "Freedom of Information Legislation"
- Status
T
TEPO
Guest
Each time I get fired they keep me on the “top” of the books and consider each “call-out” a “short-call”… That way I don’t have to go back to the bottom of the list.
I’m hoping to catch one contractor who overlooks the issue…
S
St_Francis
Guest
I’m not catering to any corporations, I’m thinking about the poor guy stuck working with someone who drinks on the job. Sure, there’s no evidence that *you *drink on the job, but there is some evidence that you drink and drive, which is a really dumb and dangerous thing to do and shows very poor judgement on your part.Hah…! I was in my personal vehicle on my OWN time… If what you say is true, then airline pilots, heavy equipment operators, or anyone who operates any machine at all should lose their job too if caught driving “intoxicated”…
After all, I’ve certainly never operated a commercial vehicle intoxicated… Thats the whole problem… And dont tell me that you’ve never left a family barbeque after having a couple of drinks… Odds are you probably have.
The only use I have for operating a commercial vehicle is for the purpose of using the hydraulic bucket.
And like I said, if my driving record was that bad, the feds would never have given me my CDL license back in the first place, since a second DUI banns you from holding a CDL for life.
My problem with posts like yours, is that you and a handful of others prefer to cater to the companies and corporations before lending a helping hand to simple people like me. That is the real problem…!!
I’m sure there are plenty of guys out there who have never had a DUI, so naturally they are the ones who are going to get the jobs over people who have shown such a lack of judgement as to have driven while legally drunk.
And you still don’t even see a problem with it, acting like it’s totally normal to have a couple of drinks and then drive. Sorry, not everyone drinks and drives.
T
TEPO
Guest
Thats great, your entitled to your opinion, although I think you are in the minority. I also think hard line attitudes like yours are similar to those who love to put up more speed cameras on the freeways, tap into phone conversations, allow illegal search ans seizures, and generally monitor the population with no regard to privacy…
That is a very dangerous attitude.
T
TEPO
Guest
I just don;'t get how “retaining my job” is a privilege…? I went to college and a 4 year apprenticeship to get where I am only to have it all stripped away…
My kids are the ones who are really suffering – yet some Catholics still want to play politics.
My kids are the ones who are really suffering – yet some Catholics still want to play politics.
S
St_Francis
Guest
Do you understand how much more likely a person who is driving drunk is to *kill *someone? Hello??? do you read the papers?
I mean, I have never known someone who was killed by a drunk driver (tho I knew someone who paralyzed himself by diving into a pond while drink), but jsut reading about it makes me feel so very bad for the parents who are left.
And the lives of those who are terribly hurt by a drink driver?
Because, you see, drunk drivers are much more likely to make a mistake or be over confident. They are much more likely to do things while driving that they otherwise wouldnt’ do, and that sober people wouldn’t try when driving.
So, I am against all that other stuff, but I don’t like drunk drivers, because they hurt and kill people for a really stupid reason, which is they were too dumb, drunk, proud, or whatever to keep from driving when they weren’t in good shape to.
S
St_Francis
Guest
Guess what? *You messed up. *You drove while you were legally drunk. That was stupid. Man up and admit that *you *messed up.I just don;'t get how “retaining my job” is a privilege…? I went to college and a 4 year apprenticeship to get where I am only to have it all stripped away…
My kids are the ones who are really suffering – yet some Catholics still want to play politics.
I’m sorry that your children are suffering because *you *messed up, but that happens. Show them how to act like mature responsible adults instead of feeling sorry for yourself and whining. I bet if one of your children breaks a rule and gets punished for it, you don’t put up with any whining on their part, do you?
All that wasn’t “stripped away” as you put it. All that was *thrown away *by your decision to drive when you had been drinking.
You are really lucky. You didn’t get caught driving while intoxicated as the result of an accident in which someone else’s children were killed, as has happened to many other people. You didn’t get a life-long sentence of being disabled as the result of someone’s driving drunk right into you, or someone else’s drinking at work and dropping you onto a high-voltage line.
T
TEPO
Guest
What does your dislike towards drunk drivers have to do with this thread…? I don’t like them either in fact I hate them…! There now are you happy…?
This thread is about protecting the privacy of Americans whether they are perfect or have made a mistake… It is one thing to be a habitual offender, those deserve their liberties taken away… But first time offenders – come on… Where’s your compassion…?
Do you really think that I deserve to be homeless for 2+ years and have to be seperated from my two daughters for a dui…? Is that really just punishment for the crime…? Is it really…?
T
TEPO
Guest
Get off your high-horse, I know I messed up. Now stop derailing this thread. The point here is to see what is JUST punishment, I’m not here to say that drunk drivers should just get off the hook…
S
St_Francis
Guest
I know a lot of people who were put out of work because of a decision by the government into which they had no (name removed by moderator)ut. Them I feel sorry for. I know people who are out of work because their companies folded. I know people who are out of work because of things other people did. Guess what? *You messed up. *why should I feel sorry for *you, *when you are the one who messed up, when there are people all over this country who are out of work through no fault of their own?What does your dislike towards drunk drivers have to do with this thread…? I don’t like them either in fact I hate them…! There now are you happy…?
This thread is about protecting the privacy of Americans whether they are perfect or have made a mistake… It is one thing to be a habitual offender, those deserve their liberties taken away… But first time offenders – come on… Where’s your compassion…?
Do you really think that I deserve to be homeless for 2+ years and have to be seperated from my two daughters for a dui…? Is that really just punishment for the crime…? Is it really…?
I believe that our privacy should be protected, but I also think that other people should be protected. I think that if someone is stupid enough to drink and drive that a company which has employees working under very dangerous circumstances has the right to protect their other workers from someone who makes stupid decisions like endangering other people by drinking and driving.
It is very rare that the one time a person gets a DUI is the only time they have driven under the influence, so people take it seriously if someone has a DUI, esp if they are running a company in which the employees are doing dangerous things.
I can’t imagine what my dislike of drunk drivers has to do with this thread, which was started by someone complaining because he has to suffer as the result of getting caught while driving drunk–oh! that was you! maybe you should think about what started this whole thing off–I’m sure you’re not complaining about the lack of privacy the government has to work in secret without letting anyone know what they are up to.
And FOIA has nothing to do with your problem anyway. Driving records are released all the time, to protect other people. Don’t want to suffer as a result of drinking and then driving? *Don’t drive after you have been drinking. *
T
TEPO
Guest
The purpose of this thread is to show that there is reason for those who have a “record” to be able to keep their employment… That is all…
There are also benefits to it, like I said…
Assuming someone has served their punishment, they should be given their liberties back…!!!
There are also benefits to it, like I said…
- reduce crime rate
- reduce prison inmate population
- reduce illegal immigration
- reduce drug rate
etc, etc, etc…
Assuming someone has served their punishment, they should be given their liberties back…!!!
T
TEPO
Guest
I hope you feel better now that you’ve gotten that off your chest… But like I said over and over again, this thread is not about me… It’s about everyone who has lost employment and the ability to support their family.
You say that there are others through no fault of their own have lost employment… Yes, thats a problem. But just because that is true, it does not mean that we have the right to ignore those who are held down and suppressed and forced to live off welfare for the rest of their lives, just because there is no hope for them.
Liberty my friend, Liberty is the ability to find work… And because America continues to ignore it, is why we have inner-city crime rates out the roof, illegal immigration, and a load of other problems…
Wake-up…!
S
St_Francis
Guest
Sure, like any sensible business person would hire an embezzler to keep their books.
Guess, what? Your union is helping you out. You are luckier than those who don’t ahve unions and who have lost their jobs through no fault of their own.
You are going to be hirable again in three years. Guess what? You are luckier than those who have become disabled for life through no fault of their own.
Personally, I reserve my pity for those who are out of work through no fault of their own. Sure, I believe in redemption; I am Catholic, after all. But you can’t generalize your problems into some sort of national problem and expect to get away with it. Your problem is that you messed up and you don’t want to deal with the results. You want everything to continue as if you hadn’t messed up, and life is just not like that. Your comment that you think it’s normal for people to drink a couple and drive away from a family barbeque scare me, because I suspect you might still be doing that.
R
revert_jen
Guest
I’m not sure what you’re getting at here. You started this thread as a campaign against some still unstated provisions of the FOIA. “People being held down and supressed by those in power” is not a provision of the act, but more of a political slogan.
Then when people point out to you that the availability of your criminal record is unrelated to the FOIA, you accuse them of playing politics. I’m not sure how those are related.
I’d want to see reliable statistics about that before I believed it. (I don’t doubt that you believe it, I just mean that you might be mistaken.) Some people, knowing that they would be severely hampered from getting a job if they were arrested for DUI, may avoid drinking and driving. People with records have already shown that they are not overly concerned about breaking the law. It seems to me that if they thought they could break the law and then nobody would ever have to know about it, it would make them more likely to do it again, not less.
The government is not preventing you from doing anything. They are not preventing you from working, stripping away your employment, or anything like that.
What is happening is that employers have the right to ask whether prospective employees have a criminal record. They also have the right not to employ these higher-risk employees if they prefer not to. You would like to take away that right.
In most states, prospective employers cannot do a criminal background check unless you give them permission, but they can refuse to hire you if you refuse permission.
Frankly, employers can fire you for a bunch of reasons. For example, any of the following would be (theoretically, anyway) grounds for dismissal from my company:
- Dating my manager without informing HR
- Having a legally registered gun locked in the trunk of my car in the office parking lot
- Putting an extra $30 expense on my expense report
- And of course, lying about anything whatsoever on my application or other employment papers
I think part of your problem is that you quite evidently don’t think what you did was a big deal. I think you would get much more sympathy from people if you didn’t seem to think that DUI was such small potatoes.
Serving time/paying fines/whatever is not some kind of magic wipe-the-slate-clean thing. You have your liberties back. But it doesn’t make what happened not happen. In time (and five years isn’t so long as such things go) people will feel safer about the likelihood of you doing it again, and you will be employable in your original job again.
If you feel you can convince a judge that the DUI was not part of a pattern of behavior, and that you are suffering undue hardship as a result, you can try to get your record expunged. Then it won’t affect you any more.
The fact is that you need a job more than an employer needs you. If you suspect that companies who refuse to hire you because of a DUI less than five years ago are hiring illegal aliens instead, well, it seems unlikely to me. If they’re worried about covering themselves to that extent, they are probably not going to hire illegal aliens, especially in this economy where it is probably not that difficult to hire people who are in this country legally and have no drinking-related traffic offenses. Anyway, in general, illegal aliens are NOT making six-figure salaries, so they have probably NOT taken your old job and the question of illegal immigration in relation to having secret adult criminal records does not arise.
The government isn’t doing anything to you. If you want to get mad at someone, get mad at the employers. They’re making the choices. All the government is doing is allowing them access to public information to enable them to make informed choices.
I’m sorry this sounds harsh. I really do feel bad if one slip has caused you all of this heartache and trouble for your children. One of the reasons that people come down so hard on DUI is because usually a person is a habitual drunk-driver before they get arrested for it. But certainly it is not always the case, and if you’re being treated like a person who was in the habit of drinking and driving when you only did it once and were unlucky, then I really do sympathize. I still disagree that criminal records should be made secret, but I sympathize, and hope you find work (perhaps in some slightly different field, just for a couple of years) that will enable you to support your family.
–Jen
T
TEPO
Guest
Jen and Francis,
You know, I do wish that employers lost the right to do background checks on people… The only background checks that are really necessary ought to be calling previous employers and using good old fashioned references…!!
Can’t you both see how out-of-hand things are getting here nowadays…? We’ve even got GPS systems in all the trucks that shoot an e-mail to the boss when we speed for Gods sake…
Can someone please tell me what harm it would do to our society as a whole, to allow those with “records” to remain un-targeted and allowed to blend right back into the population…? Also, does anyone actually believe that it is good for the economy to make “unemployable” people, who become dependent on unemployment and eventually welfare…?
Aside from mere speculation, WHY am I wrong…?
You know, I do wish that employers lost the right to do background checks on people… The only background checks that are really necessary ought to be calling previous employers and using good old fashioned references…!!
Can’t you both see how out-of-hand things are getting here nowadays…? We’ve even got GPS systems in all the trucks that shoot an e-mail to the boss when we speed for Gods sake…
Can someone please tell me what harm it would do to our society as a whole, to allow those with “records” to remain un-targeted and allowed to blend right back into the population…? Also, does anyone actually believe that it is good for the economy to make “unemployable” people, who become dependent on unemployment and eventually welfare…?
Aside from mere speculation, WHY am I wrong…?
T
TEPO
Guest
What gives them that right…? How did they aquire such a right…?
By contacting previous employers - an embezzlers identity would be revealed…
Jen and Francis,
You know, I do wish that employers lost the right to do background checks on people… The only background checks that are really necessary ought to be calling previous employers and using good old fashioned references…!!
Can’t you both see how out-of-hand things have become nowadays…? My last company had GPS systems installed in all the trucks that would shoot an e-mail to the boss if we would so much as break the speed limit…
Can someone please tell me what harm it would do to our society as a whole, to allow those with “records” to remain un-targeted and allowed to blend back into the population…? Also, does anyone actually believe that it is good for the economy to create millions of “unemployable” people, who become dependent on unemployment benefits and then eventually welfare…?
Aside from mere speculation, WHY am I wrong…?
T
TEPO
Guest
As Catholics, we should all be striving to support the less fortunate in this world… I’m not here to apply for your pity, or to get the gov. to slack up on DUIs, I just dont understand why the laws are geared toward assisting the corporations and not the people.
People say that FOIA has nothing to do with allowing personal records to become public… But if that were true, then how does gov. records become released…? How then does an employer have a right to obtain such information if not for the FOIA…?
People say that FOIA has nothing to do with allowing personal records to become public… But if that were true, then how does gov. records become released…? How then does an employer have a right to obtain such information if not for the FOIA…?
G
Graubo3
Guest
In December of 2008 I was passing by a corner in Chandler, Arizona. Many day laborers. My cousin asked “How much?” There was not one in that dozen willing to work for under $20/hour. There is work out there but you are tied to your union, for better or worse. I bet that corner is going to be empty soon.
As far as the FOIA, I am glad that I can find out information on people that I do not give my trust to right away. Un-Christian, maybe, but I am not easily taken advantage of either. That is where my definition of liberty differs from yours. I like the program telling me who is on the opposing team. Your in my prayers. Been there and done that too by the way and became better because of the lumps. Thank God I never killed anyone, especially a family like I have now; I would have blown my brains out.
Peace, Graubo
S
St_Francis
Guest
Employers won’t give a person a bad reference anymore because of lawsuits. Seriously.
Why do prospective employers get to do background checks? Because we don’t live in small-town America anymore. People opted for other things, but now people don’t know each other any more, and so, background checks, esp for jobs that require a certain amount of maturity and good decision-making. Like, an embezzler might be able to be hired to dig ditches, but not to be a cashier in a bank.
First of all, I doubt you ever gave this a second thought until it happened to you. Right?
Secondly, yes, people working on high-voltage lines have the right to protect themselves from irresponsible people. You have 5 years in which to prove yourself responsible enough to do that.
What would it hurt society? Well, we are in a big financial crisis. How much bigger or earlier might that crisis have been had we allowed criminals to work in the banking industry? Do you think your bank has the right to check on the backgrounds of those who are taking care of the money you have in the bank and make sure they are not going to steal it?
And do you think that people who have to work with people on dangerous equipment and the like have no right to find out if they are responsible people or not?
And do you think that people who have to drive on the road have a right to drive on a road that does not have drunks driving on it?
You mention your company’s GPS system. why do they have that? because if one of their drivers runs into someone, the company will get sued–deep pockets.
V
vera_dicere
Guest
While I’m sure there are some instances where such a bill can damage the privacy of the individual, these leglisations are important because they ensure transparency.
We have an “Official information release act” in my country which, under certain circumstances, governmental, individual and corporate information can be released if it determined that release of such information is in the public interest.
For example, knowing where your tax dollars are going.
This sort of leglisation is absolutely vital in ensuring a system of public accountability.
Of course, it depends on what info is required of the individual citizen, and I’m sure, the public doesn’t care what Joe Blogs is leaving in his toilet.
We have an “Official information release act” in my country which, under certain circumstances, governmental, individual and corporate information can be released if it determined that release of such information is in the public interest.
For example, knowing where your tax dollars are going.
This sort of leglisation is absolutely vital in ensuring a system of public accountability.
Of course, it depends on what info is required of the individual citizen, and I’m sure, the public doesn’t care what Joe Blogs is leaving in his toilet.
- Status