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?

    • retrieval4558@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      6 months ago

      And the shocking percentage of innocent people who are forced into bad plea deals or railroaded by the system? Do we throw away the key for them too?

      • lightnsfw@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        31
        ·
        6 months ago

        Those people are why I didn’t say we should execute them. They can still prove their innocence and get out.

        • Maggoty@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          19
          ·
          6 months ago

          The system doesn’t work, we should just throw away the key, and somehow the innocent will prove they are so from behind the gates we locked forever?

          That’s not logical.

          • lightnsfw@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            6 months ago

            Neither is letting out convicted rapists and murderers on the off chance some of them are innocent. The fix to that problem is not to release people early, it’s to reform the investigation and trial process so that wrongful convictions don’t happen in the first place.

            • Maggoty@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              6 months ago

              Who said anything about letting people out early? You just decided I was talking about early release, but I never said that.

              The answer is, as always, spending some money on actual rehabilitation and letting them go at the end of that, or their sentence.

              • lightnsfw@reddthat.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                6 months ago

                If they have a defined sentence instead of “until you are rehabilitated” then you are letting them out early.

                • Maggoty@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  6 months ago

                  In some kinds of Justice “until rehabilitated” is the sentence. And other systems part of rehabilitation is accepting the rest of your sentence with equanimity. You are so dead set on the idea of releasing some slavering barbarian early that you’re missing the entire point of the conversation.

                  • lightnsfw@reddthat.com
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    6 months ago

                    In some kinds of Justice “until rehabilitated” is the sentence

                    If that was true in ALL kinds I would be fine with it. It’s not. I’ve personally known people released from prison who were no better than when they went in.

        • samus12345@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          16
          ·
          6 months ago

          One the system gets ahold of you, it’s almost impossible to escape it regardless of your innocence.