So I just discovered that I have been working next to the waste of oxygen that raped my best friend several years ago. I work in a manufacturing environment and I know that you can’t fire someone just for being a sex offender unless it directly interferes with work duties (in the US). But despite it being a primarily male workforce he does work with several women who have no idea what he is. He literally followed a woman home, broke into her house, and raped her. Him working here puts every female employee at risk. How is that not an unsafe working environment? How is it at even legal to employ him anywhere where he will have contact with women?

          • TexMexBazooka@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            11
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            Because companies don’t want to take on the liability of hiring someone that they don’t think they can trust.

            I don’t really get your narrative about someone hiring a thief over a rapist- both felony convictions will limit your opportunities.

            • pinkdrunkenelephants@lemmy.cafe
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              15
              ·
              9 months ago

              You’re not listening. Companies shouldn’t hire either. And we’re talking specifically about rapists, not thieves. Don’t waste my time trying to strawman.

                • pinkdrunkenelephants@lemmy.cafe
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  6
                  ·
                  9 months ago

                  Ignore strawmen like yours right now.

                  Meanwhile, the rest of us will keep rapists out of workplaces where they have opportunities to harm others and live our lives knowing we have the best interests of those around us at heart.

                  • TexMexBazooka@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    4
                    ·
                    9 months ago

                    Ok, so where should they and any other felony convictions go after they serve their time? It’s a very pertinent question.

    • jaek@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      33
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      No, it isn’t. You can fully believe in people’s ability to rehabilitate and change, while also being aware that not everyone rehabilitates and changes.

      The needs of the perpetrator of a crime need to be balanced against the needs of society at large. This is why you get your license taken away from you when you drink and drive, or why you end up on a sex offenders register.

      In this case, there’s a valid argument to be made that this person represents a danger to society, and the need to protect/inform people from him outweighs his desire to not have past crimes revealed.

      • Maggoty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        23
        ·
        9 months ago

        If you can get a psychologist to sign off on him having uncontrollable urges then yeah. Otherwise he needs the same chances as every other ex felon.

      • WaxedWookie@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        9 months ago

        You can fully believe in people’s ability to rehabilitate and change, while also being aware that not everyone rehabilitates and changes. (…) In this case, there’s a valid argument to be made that this person represents a danger to society

        What is that valid argument? OP said that indicates an ongoing danger, and if they’re an ongoing danger, what do we do in response to that beyond not covering up their crimes (which are already reported on the sex offender registry)?

        The law is far from perfect, but it’s hard to overstate the danger of basing the rule of law on vibes - which you appear to be doing.