Yes upon release for all offenders
Yes upon release for non-violent offenders and never for violent offenders
Yes upon releases for non-violent offenders and a certain amount of time for violent offenses.
Yes after 1-5 years
Yes after 6-10 years
Yes after 11-15 years
Yes after 16-20 years
Yes after 21-30 years
Yes but time of record deletion should depend on offense.
Criminal records should never be erased.
If, when defending your support for Donald Trump, and your response is,
"But but but... HILLARY!!!", then you lost the argument before you even began.
Ah yes, personal experience -- the DP gold standard.[/QUOTE]
I prove you wrong and you try to diminish that. No surprise there.
“Capitalism is the astounding belief that the most wickedest of men will do the most wickedest of things for the greatest good of everyone.” John Maynard Keynes
Daily KOS) to 65 million (National Employment Law Project) among those with a political stake in the numbers.
There are 310 million citizens in our country. It's easy to see that even using the high and perhaps inflated number, the vast majority of Americans have no criminal record. Also easy to see how Cephus could not know anyone who has one.
I don't have a criminal record, heck, never had so much as a speeding ticket and I drove around with long hair and a full beard when those things were not acceptable - IOW, I stuck out like a sore thumb.
Here's a hint - don't do the crime in the first place.
Criminal records should be based on tangible damages to society. Criminals convicted or violent crimes or felonies with high impact should have permanent records.
People arrested for petty crimes, small drug possession, etc. should have an expiry date on their records. Of course, it would make a lot more sense if we consolidated our legal system to eliminate the bloated and unnecessary laws on the books. That, combined with the Patriot Act, means a person could be arrested for practically anything. Our government is becoming truly oppressive.
There are those who cannot even enter the United States because they were convicted of possessing a small amount of cannabis 25 years ago. That's just ridiculous.
In reality, employment applications are pretty much broilerplate, have been for quite some time. They've always included the question, "Have you ever been convicted of a felony" followed by a blank space titled, "If so, please explain:". If you were arrested for possession of pot in a state that considers/considered that a felony, the applicant can explain that. Most businesses I've seen will evaluate the explanation and decide if your felony is germaine to their business and if it is behind you.
I know quite a few people working for tech giants that had non-violent felonies disclosed at application time. Obviously they got the job anyway.
Keeping criminal records on the majority of criminals only ensures that they will remain criminals.
An alternative, would be to keep an in house record, meaning that employment background checks wouldn't be able to see but should the perp be a repeat offender than this will be viewable by the police and court.
The United States represents roughly 5% of the population of Earth, and yet of all the people in prison around the world, 25% of them are here. The sum total of everyone here in the states who is in prison, on parole or on probation works out to roughly 3% of the population. Roughly one in three Americans have been arrested by age 23.
In Search of a Job: Criminal Records as Barriers to Employment | National Institute of Justice
Criminal Justice Fact Sheet | NAACP
The Prison Crisis | American Civil Liberties Union
You're welcome to take shots at my sources, if you can either prove them untrue or find better sources. If you take shots at my sources just because you don't like them, I will laugh at you and then forget you said anything. Seeing as how the first source is a .gov, I wish you luck.