Automatic sealing of non-violent criminal records passes final vote in Colorado | Hacker News Reader

Automatic sealing of non-violent criminal records passes final vote in Colorado

coloradopolitics.com

19 pointsmooreds10 comments

The obvious problem with such bills is that employers like to use more information to find better qualified candidates. There are already certain forbidden pieces of information, such as using the candidates gender+age to determine the likelihood that they will take maternity leave. However, since it is very easy for the employer to determine it without asking (does the candidate look like a young women), it is sometimes still done and hard to lawfully prevent.

Similarly, employers use heuristics to determine whether the candidate may steal (or perform other antisocial behaviour) from the employer. For example, past criminal history can help determine future criminal history. If that information is hidden, an employer can use a (much less accurate) heuristic and calculate the criminal record of the candidate based on the race [1].

The obvious argument for sealing criminal records is that the ex-con served his sentence, paid off his debt to society, and has been rehabilitated. However, I assume that most people do not believe that ex-cons are rehabilitated and rather look at the statistics of first offence rates vs recidivism to see that he opposite holds.

If the issue of temporary prison sentences turning into life sentences is to be fixed, the prison rehabilitation process needs to be changed. I'm not sure what the proper solution is (maybe a longer parole-like state where the ex-con is monitored more that average, or prison sentences that can be extended significantly is the prisoner is determined to have not rehabilitates sufficiently). But until then, laws like this will hurt non-ex-cons (who now have to compete against ex-cons) without helping society.

Somewhat unrelated, this quote from the article is just plain wrong

> We can bring more people into the workforce

More jobs won't be opened, rather the same jobs will be opened, but the pool of candidates will just grow.

[1] https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/blogs/sta...

>I assume that most people do not believe that ex-cons are rehabilitated

It is this attitude along with treating the justice system as purely a trafficker of punishment instead of taking people out of society to rehabilitate them to interact better

There's a reason the Nordic system has far lower rates of recidivism, because they actually try to rehabilitate people for reintegration in society.

In the US, as you state, it marks people for life. This prevents getting legitimate work and forces people who may have made a mistake once to commit further crimes just to survive.

Add that onto the fact that US prisons are shitholes where there is no structure or activities and people just teach each other about how to get better at commuting crimes

Its the US system and attitude that's dogshit and could be changed. But we have too many people in this country with a boner for retribution and the suffering of the other

So employers in Colorado won't be allowed to refuse to hire people as bookkeepers just because they were previously convicted of embezzling while working as a bookkeeper for someone else in the past?

It's difficult to read the text with all the inline deletions and internal references, but the following is effectively repeated at least 3 times in different portions of the bill,

> A party or agency required by law to conduct a criminal history record check is authorized to use any sealed conviction for the lawful purpose for which the criminal history record check is required by law

https://leg.colorado.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2022A...

Are you required by law to conduct a criminal history record check before hiring a bookkeeper for a private business?

I have no idea. I pointed it out because 1) I was curious and 2) to suggest that concern for unintended consequences is given at least some treatment in the actual text of the legislation.

The question isn’t really relevant:

> If signed into law by the governor, Senate Bill 99 would implement an automatic sealing process for non-violent criminal records.

> This would apply to those who are eligible to request record sealing under the current system – meaning they have finished their sentence, completed a required waiting period and have not committed another criminal offense.

This bill simply makes automatic something that was previously an apparently expensive bureaucratic process that had to be initiated by the individual.

If they’ve completed their sentence, why should it matter? Might they do it again? Maybe, maybe they learned their lesson. I do think it might be more unlikely someone would repeat the exact same white-collar crime, at least less likely than a stranger doing the same crime for the first time.

They could also go into forensic auditing as a consultant since they know what to look for.

I have the exactly opposite initial reaction, for what it’s worth. To me the answer to your questions:

Yes, it could matter

I agree they might do it again

I think past behavior is highly predictive of future behavior, compared to the average incidence in the population

I live by the philosophy: you can do whatever you want as long as you’re willing to pay the price and deal with the consequences.

They paid their price (sentence) and maybe people not trusting them with money is a consequence. It doesn’t mean it should be forever. People grow and change, they have the capability to learn.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com