OT: Police DNA Checkpoints Arriving at a City Near You Soon!!

[njtosd]

[quote=spdrun]Who knows? One of the most likely theories for the rise and drop of crime rates in the US involves the introduction and prohibition of leaded gasoline…

http://www.forbes.com/sites/alexknapp/2013/01/03/how-lead-caused-americas-violent-crime-epidemic/

“Three strikes” is the typical American mentality of punishment over prevention and rehabilitation.[/quote]

Wait, because one guy from Mother Jones has some statistics doesn’t mean lead is “one of the most likely theories.” It is an interesting theory – might be true. Association between lead and IQ is easier to prove. In any event, if you don’t care about punishing people, only rehabilitating them, it doesn’t matter why they committed their crimes; whether the cause is lead or a choice to be evil, the crime is the same (and prevention, at least for those who have already had the damage done, is out of the question).

[CA renter]

[quote=no_such_reality]Los Angeles Sheriff Department’s stringent hiring practices.

[quote]Sheriff’s Department hired officers with histories of misconduct

Despite background investigations that revealed wrongdoing, incompetence, or poor performance, the department still hired dozens of problem applicants in 2010, internal records show.

The department made the hires in 2010 after taking over patrols of parks and government buildings from a little-known L.A. County police force. Officers from that agency were given first shot at new jobs with the Sheriff’s Department. Investigators gave them lie detector tests and delved into their employment records and personal lives.

The Times reviewed the officers’ internal hiring files, which also contained recorded interviews of the applicants by sheriff’s investigators.

Ultimately, about 280 county officers were given jobs, including applicants who had accidentally fired their weapons, had sex at work and solicited prostitutes, the records show.

For nearly 100 hires, investigators discovered evidence of dishonesty, such as making untrue statements or falsifying police records. At least 15 were caught cheating on the department’s own polygraph exams.

Twenty-nine of those given jobs had previously had been fired or pressured to resign from other law enforcement agencies over concerns about misconduct or workplace performance problems. Nearly 200 had been rejected from other agencies because of past misdeeds, failed entrance exams or other issues.[/quote]

Best pay attention next time you’re in Los Angeles County.[/quote]

So, if you think the hiring standards aren’t stringent enough, what would you recommend they do differently? Very easy to complain, not so easy to come up with workable solutions.

BTW, which other jobs, outside of govt work (direct or indirect) require a person to go through a process as stringent as the one currently in place in these departments?

[CDMA ENG]

[quote=CA renter][quote=no_such_reality]Los Angeles Sheriff Department’s stringent hiring practices.

[quote]Sheriff’s Department hired officers with histories of misconduct

Despite background investigations that revealed wrongdoing, incompetence, or poor performance, the department still hired dozens of problem applicants in 2010, internal records show.

The department made the hires in 2010 after taking over patrols of parks and government buildings from a little-known L.A. County police force. Officers from that agency were given first shot at new jobs with the Sheriff’s Department. Investigators gave them lie detector tests and delved into their employment records and personal lives.

The Times reviewed the officers’ internal hiring files, which also contained recorded interviews of the applicants by sheriff’s investigators.

Ultimately, about 280 county officers were given jobs, including applicants who had accidentally fired their weapons, had sex at work and solicited prostitutes, the records show.

For nearly 100 hires, investigators discovered evidence of dishonesty, such as making untrue statements or falsifying police records. At least 15 were caught cheating on the department’s own polygraph exams.

Twenty-nine of those given jobs had previously had been fired or pressured to resign from other law enforcement agencies over concerns about misconduct or workplace performance problems. Nearly 200 had been rejected from other agencies because of past misdeeds, failed entrance exams or other issues.[/quote]

Best pay attention next time you’re in Los Angeles County.[/quote]

So, if you think the hiring standards aren’t stringent enough, what would you recommend they do differently? Very easy to complain, not so easy to come up with workable solutions.

BTW, which other jobs, outside of govt work (direct or indirect) require a person to go through a process as stringent as the one currently in place in these departments?[/quote]

Stringent? Perhaps… but largely ignored.

This is a great example of the “good ol boy” network.

This is ridicoulous and indefensable. Period.

CE

[scaredyclassic]

[quote=temeculaguy]Why do people still champion the pizza thief, he was let go after appeal so he never really got the three strikes treatment. Oh, and he was no saint either, still isn’t. But the premise of the law is that if you commit a heinous felony (public demonstrations turning to riots does not count) and you go to prison, not jail. Then commit another one and go to prison again, and then, any felony counts as your third. Even if you kill 2 people in one day, you only get one strike. If you kill 5 people before getting caught, one strike. The point is that after you are caught, serve time, get out, do it again, serve time, you don’t get to do anything wrong, perhaps you need to stay away from potential riots at that point.

Here is a list of the felonies that qualify as your first two strikes.

http://www.threestrikes.org/tscrimes.html

The only one that doesn’t seem heinous is the burglary of an inhabited dwelling. If they dropped that one, the rest are pretty damn bad. If you read the list, spousal abuse is not listed. Bar fights not listed. Public protest that ends in a riot, not listed, unless you manage to molest a child during the protest, then I guess you are just exercising your right to free speech and things went bad. Damn government.[/quote]

PC 422 is a strike. basically, that’s making a credible threat that puts someone in sustained fear of bodily harm.

[scaredyclassic]

[quote=temeculaguy]Why do people still champion the pizza thief, he was let go after appeal so he never really got the three strikes treatment. Oh, and he was no saint either, still isn’t. But the premise of the law is that if you commit a heinous felony (public demonstrations turning to riots does not count) and you go to prison, not jail. Then commit another one and go to prison again, and then, any felony counts as your third. Even if you kill 2 people in one day, you only get one strike. If you kill 5 people before getting caught, one strike. The point is that after you are caught, serve time, get out, do it again, serve time, you don’t get to do anything wrong, perhaps you need to stay away from potential riots at that point.

Here is a list of the felonies that qualify as your first two strikes.

http://www.threestrikes.org/tscrimes.html

The only one that doesn’t seem heinous is the burglary of an inhabited dwelling. If they dropped that one, the rest are pretty damn bad. If you read the list, spousal abuse is not listed. Bar fights not listed. Public protest that ends in a riot, not listed, unless you manage to molest a child during the protest, then I guess you are just exercising your right to free speech and things went bad. Damn government.[/quote]

you can pick up two strikes in one case.

[scaredyclassic]

the State can amend the list of strikeable offenses at any time, and if you were convicted of it previously, it will become a strike after the state changes the law, even if it was not previously a strikeable offense.

[scaredyclassic]

[quote=temeculaguy]Why do people still champion the pizza thief, he was let go after appeal so he never really got the three strikes treatment. Oh, and he was no saint either, still isn’t. But the premise of the law is that if you commit a heinous felony (public demonstrations turning to riots does not count) and you go to prison, not jail. Then commit another one and go to prison again, and then, any felony counts as your third. Even if you kill 2 people in one day, you only get one strike. If you kill 5 people before getting caught, one strike. The point is that after you are caught, serve time, get out, do it again, serve time, you don’t get to do anything wrong, perhaps you need to stay away from potential riots at that point.

Here is a list of the felonies that qualify as your first two strikes.

http://www.threestrikes.org/tscrimes.html

The only one that doesn’t seem heinous is the burglary of an inhabited dwelling. If they dropped that one, the rest are pretty damn bad. If you read the list, spousal abuse is not listed. Bar fights not listed. Public protest that ends in a riot, not listed, unless you manage to molest a child during the protest, then I guess you are just exercising your right to free speech and things went bad. Damn government.[/quote]

a bar fight may be a strike if you attack with a “deadly weapon”. a deadly weapon could be a bottle.

[scaredyclassic]

third strike now cannot be any third felony. it must be a qualifying third strike, which means an actual strike offense. it is more difficult and less likely to get struck out now.

[scaredyclassic]

if you have one strike however, any second felony is presumptively prison, doubled, and with less good time.

[CA renter]

[quote=CDMA ENG]

Stringent? Perhaps… but largely ignored.

This is a great example of the “good ol boy” network.

This is ridicoulous and indefensable. Period.

CE[/quote]

How were they ignored? All we know is that one agency basically took over for another agency, and the existing employees were able to stay on…and even then, they made them go through a process that included polygraph tests. We do not know what the circumstances were behind the supposed offenses that they were “guilty” of when working for the LA County department. We don’t know how many of them were guilty (was it one or two people), nor do we know how long ago these offenses occurred (could have been 20+ years, with exemplary service since then), and we don’t know whether or not they were already punished and what that punishment entailed.

Are you going to tell me that people who were fired from a tech company, for instance, should NEVER be allowed to work for a tech company again, even if they were punished and/or had proven themselves over time?

[Author]

Posts