I tried to be a slick guy and ask my boss if he knew who Cesare Lombroso was and his significance to why fingerprinting.
Of course he did not know who or what I was talking about.
So I briefly said he is why we had to be fingerprinted before we were offered our positions at our job.
To be approved or cleared to work anywhere you have to do a drug test or a fingerprinting test to make sure that you are not a criminal or have any prior records. I do not fully agree with the gesture to finger print any one person,especially if they have “paid their debt to society” and you want to give them a second chance. For most fingerprinting and background checks to take place, one must go to a police station or some where that is associated to the police. For those persons that have been in the system this would not be the most pleasant experiences. You also have to provide also want a lot of info on the card you’re supposed to bring–address, height, weight, birthplace, birth date, which is a lot of information to take fingerprints. And now what happens is, these persons are denied an opportunity to get work or to progress with their lives because no one wants to give them a second chance. The end result…recidivism. As we read about in the reading yesterday, when times get rough and no one wants to help you in your situation in life you take it into your own hands.
This is a situation that has to stop. It is similar to violence. And violence only begets more violence.
Joe Wilson
I agree with Joe on the issue that fingerprinting shouldn’t be a prerequisite to acquiring a job however a simple background check should suffice as a method to vouch for an individuals character. During the 1800’s in Europe, it was common practice to vouch for an individual’s character in the form of a letter of recommendation when a person traveled to another city. Who better can attest to your character than the people you live with, go to school with, work with and share experiences with; that to me speaks volumes than a mere fingerprint that determines whether you are a criminal or have engaged in criminal activity in the past.
The penitentiary system serves as a rehabilitation center in other words; this is the society’s way of giving you a second chance. Sounds fair right? But how are you given a ‘second chance’ when the fingerprinting system prior to employment is a way for society to judge you based on you past and it’s left for the employer at their discretion to determine whether they are equipped to deal with your method of madness. So much for equal employment opportunity
The whole system appears to be a paradox. The penitentiary system is a university for criminals. You go in a petty thief and come out an armed robber with limited career choices that are most likely to send you back into the penitentiary.
Fingerprinting and personal identification is a very common process used for background check for hiring purposes. I completely agree with Joe and Lynch that convicted felons or ex-criminals should get equal opportunity of employment. Every job appliaction have a mandatory background check; however, felons and criminals should get a second chance. Every person can make serious mistakes in their life that doesn’t mean that we should take their right of equal opportunity. I understand that security and precautions are very important in today’s world. For this purpose, we are going way more forward. Our privacy isnt there anymore. We are being tagged with numbers and codes to be evaluated by system. It getting much more complicated for felons and ex-criminals to get back to a regular life as they are being tracked forever.
There is like very limited opportunities available for convicted felons and ex-criminals. Isn’t being so cruel to not give enough space to a person who want to change and come back to normal routine. Obviously there are more chances for a felon and ex-criminal to convict a crime or felony again if he/she couldnt be able to become a non-violent and not to be a devaint person.
Keeping a safe distance from deviant people is a good precaution but judging somebody without helping them to improve is morally wrong. It should change and fingerprinting system should get avoided sometime for these people who really wants to improve their life. System needs to change and society should accept them. So, it will be easy for them to move around easily and start a new beginning.
I also agree that ex-felons should be given a second chance, depending on what crime have been committed. Fingerprints and excessive personal information shouldn’t be done or given. I believe a simple background check is still necessary to determine if the person is well qualify for the position. Its important for the company to get an idea of the kind of person they will be hiring and how they will act with other employees. There are so many misconceptions on criminals of whether they are indeed an overall good or bad person. An ex-felon could have committed a crime in self-defense or just happen to be in the wrong place, wrong time situations. If someone has a criminal record, they automatically don’t qualify for a job. Sometimes these regulations gives limitations to a ex-felon to start on a good path. Historically society has impose barriers and decrease the opportunity for not only criminals but for other people as well. In a way society can help prevent criminals from falling back into their old ways. Sometimes the not given an opportunity, criminals find other means to get money and provide for their love ones. Of course I’m not about talking given a second chance to criminals who have done hatred acts. Overall I think fingerprinting should be use in police stations or for government’s security use. The fact that human beings are very complex becomes very difficult for people to be so sure of their conclusions.
Now in days companies are not only checking into people with a criminal background but also people without criminal backgrounds. Technology makes it easier for companies to look into potential candidates. Excessive information can give a company an excuse to not hire a person, which in some cases has nothing to do with the job itself.