Ex Felons For Hire

<!– SHOW ARTICLE

They all have various policing powers, and they are all to differing degrees authorized by government to enforce the law. 

Because laws — and enforcing them — is what government is all about: 

1) So WHY will LA Sheriff Alex Villanueva’s political star rise after he took on the hordes of individuals breaking the law by loitering and residing illegally on Venice Beach? 

Because the voters and citizens believe Villanueva’s doing his job. 

2) So WHY is CD11 Councilmember Mike Bonin being served recall papers because of his opposition to Sheriff Villanueva’s efforts? 

Because the voters and citizens increasingly believe Bonin is NOT doing his job. 

3) So WHY is CD11 Councilmember Mike Bonin and his staff getting after Acting District Director Hanna Levien who called the police about a homeless person loitering/living outside the Westchester office? 

Because the voters and citizens believe that this problem was caused by Bonin NOT doing his job and forcing the police into an awkward position of wondering when and how to do their jobs. 

4) So WHY is the U.S. seeing explosive increases in crime (including violent crimes such as homicide) throughout the nation’s large cities? 

Because criminals are perceiving that police are being hampered and shackled from doing their jobs, so the criminals believe they can do whatever “job” they want on innocent, law-abiding citizens. 

5) So WHY is it so dangerous for cities and states to remove “qualified immunity” for police while D.A.’s and governors get to keep theirs. . .and all the while trashing police officers’ lives and safety in favor of those with dangerous criminal records? 

Because if police officers are afraid for their own lives, safety, fiscal future, retirement, etc., then they will have to stand down and let the public fend for itself. . .because the police just will and can NOT do their jobs. 

6) So WHY would anyone in their right mind become a police officer, particularly in a “Deep Blue” city where the police, and not those with criminal records, are suddenly the “bad guys”? 

Because some of us are so brave and selfless to do their jobs that they are willing to fight and die for the rest of us. 

7) And WHY is former Massachusetts Governor and Democratic Presidential Candidate Michael Dukakis so worried about the future chances of high-level and low-level races in the election cycles to come? 

Because Governor Dukakis, who was and still is a pretty straight shooter, lost his presidential race (and the Democratic Party lost a lot of momentum during the Reagan Era) because of a perception that the Democratic Party was NOT doing their jobs with respect to keeping American voters and citizens safe. 

Laws are about government, and government is about a shared covenant between the people and their elected/hired officials. . .and the debates are endless about how much or little law and/or enforcement is required for good government (as it always should be). 

But without laws, there is no government. Without police and enforcement, there is no government, and no society, and no quality of life. 

So let’s “Why’s” and “Wise” up. Enough of the nonsense. We can have laws. We must have laws. 

Or it’s just the Wild, Wild West (or even caveman/medieval times) all over again.

(Kenneth S. Alpern, M.D, is a dermatologist who has served in clinics in Los Angeles, Orange, and Riverside Counties, and is a proud husband and father to two cherished children and a wonderful wife. He was termed out of the Mar Vista Community Council (MVCC) twice after two stints as a Board member for 8-9 years and is also a Board member of the Westside Village Homeowners Association. He previously co-chaired the MVCC Outreach, Planning, and Transportation/Infrastructure Committees. He was previously co-chair of the CD11 Transportation Advisory Committee, the grassroots Friends of the Green Line (which focused on a Green Line/LAX connection), and the nonprofit Transit Coalition, and can be reached at Ken.Alpern@MarVista.org. The views expressed in this article are solely those of Dr. Alpern.) Photo: Fox News LA. Prepped for CityWatch by Linda Abrams.

Adblock test (Why?)

Source

State Dining Room

4:55 P.M. EDT
 
ATTORNEY GENERAL GARLAND: Good afternoon, Mr. President. It’s good to be here with you, and with local elected and community leaders, and with representatives of law enforcement.
 
Protecting our communities from violent crime is a top priority for the Department of Justice and one of our most important responsibilities.
 
I’m glad the President brought us together today to discuss a subject of such importance to the public we serve. As our participants in today’s roundtable have noted, the increase in violent crime in 2020 and early 2021 is deeply troubling.
 
That is why, last month, the Justice Department launched a comprehensive violent crime reduction strategy. This strategy is built around four principles: setting strategic enforcement priorities; fostering trust with and earning legitimacy in our communities; investing in community-based prevention and intervention programs; and measuring the results of these efforts through a decrease in violent crime, not merely by arrests and convictions, as if they were ends in themselves.
 
Now, we know that the lion’s share of violent crime reduction work is shouldered by our state, local, Tribal, and territorial law enforcement partners. Core to our strategy is targeted support of the critical work that you will be doing in the weeks and months ahead.
 
Every one of our U.S. attorney’s offices is working with its local partners to establish an immediate plan to address the spike in violent crime that typically occurs during the summer. And the law enforcement components of the Department are making enhanced resources available to help prevent and disrupt violent crime, and to focus on the most dangerous, most violent offenders.
 
The Department is also strengthening our Project Safe Neighborhoods — our cornerstone initiative that brings together law enforcement and community stakeholders to develop solutions to pressing violent crime problems.
 
Community-led efforts are vital to preventing violence before it occurs. The Justice Department has available over $1 billion in funding through over a dozen grant programs that can be used to support evidence-based, community violence intervention strategies.
 
And I want to say that’s what I found particularly useful in our discussion just a few minutes ago — was the fact that there are such evidence-based programs available. And I’m hoping that you will get together with us so that we can spread those across the country — as well, of course, funding your own.
 
A properly functioning criminal justice system is essential to our efforts, as well. The Department has grant funding available to help cities resume court operations and services that were curtailed during the COVID-19 pandemic. That includes funding for technology and equipment for courts to address the backlog of cases and enhance access to justice.
 
We know that an effective violent crime reduction strategy must also address the illegal trafficking of firearms and focus on keeping guns out of the wrong hands. And so the Department is delivering on the promises we made here at the White House in April.
 
On May 7th, we issued a proposed rule to help address the proliferation of ghost guns. On June 7th, we issued a proposed rule to clarify that pistols equipped with certain stabilizing braces are subject to the same statutory restrictions as easily concealable, short-barreled rifles. And on the same day, the Department published model Extreme Risk Protection Order legislation for states to consider as they craft their own laws to reduce gun violence.

We are now taking further steps. First, we will hold gun dealers that break the rules accountable for their actions. Most federally licensed firearms dealers operate legally in selling guns to individuals who have passed background checks. But those dealers that willfully violate the law increase the risk that guns will fall into the wrong hands. 
 
Absent extraordinary circumstances, ATF will initiate proceedings to revoke the licenses of dealers that willfully violate the law by failing to conduct required background checks, falsifying records, failing to respond to trace requests, refusing to permit ATF to conduct inspections, or transferring firearms to persons who are prohibited from owning them.
 
Second, we are seeking funding to increase ATF’s dealer inspection capacity and improve its effectiveness. ATF has very limited inspection resources. The President’s Fiscal 2022 Budget requests resources to add inspection positions in every field division. The effectiveness of the enforcement program depends on the ability to identify and focus on those dealers that pose the greatest risk to public safety.
 
Starting today, ATF will make clear to investigators in every field division that, as they prioritize inspections, they must consider the extent to which firearms sold by a dealer are later used in criminal activity.
 
Third, we will improve information sharing with state, local, Tribal, and territorial partners to help bring more intelligence and law enforcement resources to bear — as well as with the public, to increase our own accountability.
 
Today, ATF has a point of contact in every field division to receive information from mayors, police chiefs, and other local leaders about firearms dealers they believe are acting unlawfully.
 
And starting next month, ATA — ATF will begin sharing inspection data with the 16 states that license or regulate firearms dealers themselves.
 
Also beginning next month, ATF will publicly post information about inspection frequency and outcomes disaggregated by field division, providing for enhanced transparency and accountability.
 
Fourth, we are launching a concerted effort to crack down on gun traffickers. Yesterday, the Department announced that it will establish five new cross-jurisdictional law enforcement strike forces within the next 30 days. The strike forces will focus on addressing significant firearms trafficking corridors that fuel violence in New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, the San Francisco Bay Area, and Washington, D.C., as well as in cities and towns along the way.
 
The Justice Department’s violent crime reduction strategy and our initiatives to stem the rising tide of illegal — illegal guns will save lives. But these steps alone will not solve the problem of violent crime. Success depends on all of us joining together: those of you in this room, the many like you across the country who are working to keep their communities safe, and the people of our communities themselves.
 
I would now like to introduce President Biden, who has emphasized the importance of this issue and who has my gratitude for gathering us together today.
 
Thank you.
 
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you, General. Let me — before I begin, thank the participants in our roundtable today: two mayors — three mayors, chiefs of police, attorneys general, and community organizers who have been doing significant work in bringing down violent crime in their communities. There is no one — one answer that fits everything. And it’s about being engaged and multiple organizations being engaged.
 
So, I want to thank you for the time you spent with us today. And I warned you: I’m coming back at you again for more information. (Laughter.)
 
And we just met, as a I said, with a bipartisan group of mayors, law enforcement, and community leaders. And we discussed a comprehensive strategy that I’m releasing today to combat the epidemic of gun violence and other violent crime that we’ve been seeing in our country for far too long, that has spiked since the start of the pandemic over a year ago.
 
Crime has — historically rises during the summer. And as we emerge from this pandemic with the country opening back up again, the traditional summer’s — summer spike may even be more pronounced than it usually would be.
 
For folks at home, here’s what you need to know: I’ve been at this a long time and there are things we know that work that reduce gun violence and violent crime, and things that we don’t know about. But things we know about: Background checks for purchasing a firearm are important; a ban on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines — no one needs to have a weapon that can fire over 30, 40, 50, even up to 100 rounds unless you think the deer are wearing Kevlar vests or something; community policing and programs that keep neighborhoods safe and keep folks out of trouble.
 
These efforts worked. They saved lives. But over time, these policies were gutted and were woefully underfunded.
 
In our conversation today, we talked about our strategy to supercharge what works while we continue to push the Congress to act on sensible gun violence legislation.
 
First, we discussed cracking down, as you heard from the Attorney General, on rogue gun dealers. We know that if there is a strict enforcement of background checks, then fewer guns get into the hands of criminals. Background checks have thus far kept more than 3 million guns out of the hands of felons — convicted felons, fugitives, domestic abusers, and others prohibited from being able to purchase a gun. And there are still too many loopholes in that system.
 
And, today, enough rogue gun dealers feel like they can get away with selling guns to people who aren’t legally allowed to own them.
 
And I might add: The Second Amendment, from the day it was passed, limited the type of people who could own a gun and what type of weapon you could own. You couldn’t buy a cannon.
 
Those who say the blood of lib- — “the blood of patriots,” you know, and all the stuff about how we’re going to have to move against the government. Well, the tree of liberty is not watered with the blood of patriots. What’s happened is that there have never been — if you wanted or if you think you need to have weapons to take on the government, you need F-15s and maybe some nuclear weapons.
 
The point is that there has always been the ability to limit — rationally limit the type of weapon that can be owned and who can own it.
 
The last time we had data on this issue of who is purchasing guns was more than 20 years ago. Five percent of gun dealers — it turns out, in the study we did — showed that 90 percent of illegal guns were found at the crime scenes sold by 5 percent of gun dealers. Five percent sold 90 percent of the guns found at crime scenes.
 
And the — these merchants of death are breaking the law for profit. They’re selling guns that are killing innocent people. It’s wrong. It’s unacceptable. And as the Attorney General said, we’re going to crack down on those gun dealers and the violent criminals they knowingly arm.
 
In April, I announced that the Justice Department is going to be issuing an annual report on gun trafficking so we can update that data.
 
Today, the Department is announcing, as I just did, a major crackdown on — to stem the flow of guns used to commit violent crimes. It’s zero tolerance for gun dealers who willfully violate key existing laws and regulations. Let me repeat: zero tolerance.
 
If you willfully sell a gun to someone who is prohibited from possessing it, if you willfully fail to run a background check, if you willfully falsify a record, if you willfully fail to cooperate with the tracing requests or inspections, my message to you is this: We’ll find you, and we will seek your license to sell guns. We’ll make sure you can’t sell death and mayhem on our streets. It’s an outrage. It has to end, and we’ll end it. Period.
 
Second, we discussed disrupting illegal gun trafficking. Now, the gun lobby wants you to believe that cities that are the toughest gun — have the toughest gun laws still have the highest rates of gun violence, as was pointed out by the group we had today in our roundtable. They — the violence is so — they argue, “Why do you need those gun laws if they don’t work in cities that have tough laws?” Don’t believe it.
 
Here’s the truth: Today’s conversation with Mayor Scott of Baltimore, for example, echoed what we know to be the case, and you hear it from mayors across the country. Mayors have the power to help shape and enforce the laws in their cities, but they can’t control the laws in neighboring cities and states, even though the gun legally bought there is — often ends up in their streets.
 
Mayor Scott says that 80 percent of the guns in Baltimore were acquired outside the city — outside the city. There’s little he can do about that, so we have to act.  
 
As part of our strategy, the Justice Department is creating five new strike forces to crack down on illegal gun trafficking in the corridors supplying weapons to cities like New York; Chicago; Los Angeles; Washington, D.C.; and the Bay Area.  
 
With these strike forces, local and federal law enforcement and prosecutors are going to be able to better coordinate the prosecution of illegal gun trafficking across city and state lines, so illegal guns sold from the back door of a gun shop in Virginia don’t end up at a murder scene in Baltimore. And if they do, then local and federal law enforcement can better coordinate to trace illegal gun sales back to the shady gun dealer and hold them accountable.  
 
Police Chief Murray of the Baltimore [sic] — excuse me, Police Chief Merritt [sic] — Police Chief Murphy Paul of Baton Rouge, Louisiana, talked about how he’s coordinating more closely with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms; the ATF; and the Federal Bureau of Investigation — the FBI — to help take on criminal organizations committing violent crimes in the city.
 
This kind of coordination is essential to keeping the weapons of war out of the hands of dangerous criminals, fugitives, and gangs, as well as organized crime.
 
Third, we discussed historic funding — we discussed historic funding for states, cities, and counties, and Tribes for law enforcement and crime prevention. You know, they’ve not only had to fight this pandemic, they’ve also had to deal with economic crisis that has decimated their budgets — forced them to cut essential services, including law enforcement and social services.
 
And amid the COVID-19 pandemic, they’ve had to deal with a second public health crisis: gun violence. The American Rescue Plan, which we passed in the first 100 days of my administration, is providing much-needed, historic relief to bring back those law enforcement jobs and social service jobs.  
 
Much of this relief has already arrived. The rest is on its way. And we’re now providing more guidance on how they can use the $350 billion nationally that the American Rescue Plan has available to help reduce crime and address the root causes.  
 
For example, cities experiencing an increase in gun violence were able to use the American Rescue Plan dollars to hire police officers needed for community policing and to pay their overtime.  
 
Mayors will also be able to buy crime-fighting technologies, like gunshot detection systems, to better see and stop gun violence in their communities.  They can use the funding to scale up wraparound services for the residents as well, including substance abuse and mental health services that we know will make a difference in prevention of crime.  
 
Here’s another example that reminds me of the old saying my mom used to use. She’d say, “An idle mind is the devil’s workshop.” Well, school’s out for the summer. Teenagers are in tough neighborhoods, no — who are in tough neighborhoods — no jobs, more trouble.  
 
We know summer job training — summer jobs, training, and recreation for young people work. They help make sure young people pick up a paycheck instead of a pistol. One study found a Boston summer jobs program for youth reduction reduced violent crimes by 35 percent in Boston.
 
Another study found that a program that offers high school students in Chicago a good summer job and an adult mentor and behavioral therapy led to a 45 percent drop in violence.
 
We can invest in more of these programs with the American Rescue Plan. And here’s another thing states, cities, counties, and Tribes can do with that funding: When someone finishes their time in prison, they can’t just give them — we can’t just continue to give them 25 bucks and a bus ticket. They end up right back where they started and got them in trouble in the first place — or no option for being able to provide for access to public housing or for schools or for — for mentors to help them find their way, and the stuff that prevents recidivism and helps them integrate in a society. That’s changing with guidance we’re issuing today.
 
The American Rescue Plan funding can help formerly incarcerated people get skills training, apprenticeships, and work experience so they can gain stability and security and a chance for a better life, rather than going back to exactly what they left.  
 
Attorney General Greenwald of New Jersey and Mayor Daniel- — and Mayor Daniella Levine Cava of Miami-Dade talked about their efforts to lift up those kinds of communit– their — the kinds of community programs that reduce gun violence, keep communities safe, and make real, positive difference in people’s lives.
 
And for folks at home, the American Rescue Plan, which is a once-in-a-generation investment to reduce violence in America, is available. I’m proud of it. It means more police officers, more nurses, more counselors, more social workers, more community violence interrupters to help resolve issues before they escalate into crimes.
 
It means we go after the people who flood our streets with guns and the bad actors who decide to use them to further terrorize the communities.  It means saving lives. And Congress should in no way take away this funding. It’s already been appropriated.  
 
In fact, a few weeks ago, the bipartisan United States Conference of Mayors, the National League of Cities, National Association of Counties — they all came out forcefully against efforts to reclaim American Rescue Plan funds that have already been allocated to the state, cities, and counties, and Tribes.  This is not a time to turn our backs on law enforcement or our communities.  
 
Fourth, we discussed the need to support community violence intervention.  These are local programs that utilize trusted messengers and community members and leaders to work directly with people who are most likely to commit gun crimes or become victims of gun crimes.  
 
We know who they are. They intervene before it’s too late — these — these interrupters — turn down the temperature, halt the cycle of retaliation, connect people to social services.  And it works. Community violence intervention programs have shown a reduction in violence of up to 60 percent in many places.  
 
We heard from two community leaders that do this work. Eddie, thank you for coming from Chicago to — you’re really — quite frankly, it was impressive — your presentation.  And — and DeVone Boggan from Richmond, California.  
 
Eddie was formerly incarcerated for gun homicide, and DeVone lost his brother to gun violence. And Eddie worked as a violence interrupter.  Now he runs a program that provides high-risk men with cognitive behavioral — cognitive behavioral therapy to help them react to the impulses by slowing down rather than following through on the violence.  It puts them in — he — puts them in paid jobs to change their trajectory.  The program has reduced sh- — has reduced shootings by 40 percent.
 
DeVone runs a program across California and six other states that enroll high-risk individuals in peace fellowships, complete with intensive mentoring and social services. It’s saving lives. In Sacramento, for example, 91 percent of participants stayed away from gun violence.
 
States and cities should invest the American Rescue Plan funds in those kinds of anti-violent crime programs. And today, I’m announcing that the White House will be working with 15 jurisdictions that are doing exactly that — from Baltimore to Baton Rouge, and Memphis to Minneapolis — to build up their community violence intervention programs, starting this summer.
 
And Mayor Steve Allender of Rapid City, South Dakota — a Republican and a former chief of police himself — joined us today and will be a part of this effort to help disrupt cycles of crime and violence in his community and nearby Tribal communities.
 
We need more mayors to follow and I’m going to be pushing to keep — pushing for more of these proven programs, which are part of the American Jobs Plan and my budget.
 
Fifth, and I’ll close with this: We talked about the lives we lost — have already been lost and the lives that we can save. We talked about how much pain and loss so many people have experienced and so many people have now accepted as their fate here in America.  
 
We have an opportunity to come together now — as Democrats and Republicans, as fellow Americans — to fulfill the first responsibility of government and our democracy: to keep each other safe. Enough.
 
That means Congress passing sensible gun prevention, violence prevention initiatives is warra- — is — makes sense: background checks, ban on assault weapons, repeal of the liability shield for gun manufacturers.
 
It means the Senate reauthorizing the Violence Against Women Act — my proudest legislative accomplishment — to close the so-called “boyfriend loophole” — its “boyfriend and stalking loophole” — to keep guns out of the hands of abusers. We added the provision saying, “If you have a stay-away order — you are stalking someone and you’re told that has to stop — you can’t own a weapon.”
 
Every single month, an average of 57 women are shot and killed by an intimate partner. We can help stop that.
 
It means confirming my outstanding nominee for — to lead the AFT — excuse me, the ATF: David Chipman. It’s been without a leader for a while. The top job has been un- — unconfirmed for much too long. A career and distinguished ATF official for 25 years, David is eminently qualified for the job that we desperately need to fill.
 
As Vice President, I pushed hard to lift the freeze on gun violence research at the C- — the Center for Disease Control, the CDC. Guess what? Why should they not be able to study gun violence and what causes it? But there’s been a block on it. I want to unfreeze that.
 
As President, my budget doubles funding for the gun violence research at the CDC and the National Institutes of Health — the NIH — to study gun violence as a public health threat that it is.
 
And while we keep pushing there, Vice President Harris and I also — and our entire administration are continuing to be — will continue taking action where we can. Let’s stop the proliferation of ghost guns, as we announced back in April with the Attorney General.
 
We need to support the development of smart gun technologies. This doesn’t affect responsible gun owners or Second Amendment rights. It helps keep guns out of the hands of people who shouldn’t have them in the first place, from a child who accidentally picks up a — picks it up, to a burglar or violent criminal trying to steal it and use it.
 
And we need to keep building on the gun violence and crime-prevention strategy we’re laying out today.
 
Folks, this shouldn’t be a red or blue issue; it’s an American issue. We’re not changing the Constitution; we’re enforcing it — being reasonable. We’re taking on the bad actors doing bad and dangerous things to our communities and to our country.
 
Talk to most responsible gun owners and hunters. They’ll tell you there’s no possible justification for having 100 rounds in a magazine of a gun. Like I’ve said before: What do you think, the deer are wearing Kevlar vests?
 
Responsible gun owners will tell you that there are too many people today who are able to buy a gun but shouldn’t be able to buy a gun.
 
And these kinds of reasonable reforms have overwhelming support from the American people, including gun owners.
 
The bottom line is this: Let’s show the world and show ourselves that democracy works and that we can come together as one nation. We can do this and save lives.
 
So, thank you. God bless you all. And may God protect our troops.
 
And again, I thank you all for participating. But the bad news for you all is, I’m coming back. I need your continued help. So, thank you very, very much.
 
And, General, thank you. Appreciate it.
 
Q  Mr. President, are you still holding out hope that Congress can pass another assault weapons ban?
 
THE PRESIDENT: I never give up hope.
 
Q  How do you feel about the bipartisan infrastructure deal that’s been released?
 
THE PRESIDENT: I’ll tell you that when I get the final numbers tonight.
 
Q  Mr. President, what do you feel is the most effective thing that government can do to change the mindset of those who feel compelled to pull the triggers of these guns?
 
THE PRESIDENT: By being engaged in a whole range of programs. We talked today — everything from mental health programs to engaging people early on and letting them know there is other options. Making sure that when a child is young, they have access to a real education, and they get started off on the right foot.
 
Making sure that when someone gets out of prison, they’re not denied public housing, they don’t have to go back under the bridge where they were living before — that they’re able to get help for healthcare, et cetera, and reengaging them in the neighborhood, giving them some hope, some opportunity. And in the meantime, making sure that those folks who are taking advantage of them by taking advantage of their — their situation are, in fact, held accountable.
 
Thank you all so much.
 
Q  Once you take care of the voting rights bill, do you think it’s time to reform the filibuster?
 
THE PRESIDENT: I think it’s time to pass the voting rights bill.
 
5:24 P.M. EDT

Adblock test (Why?)

Source

Jamie Lusch / Mail Tribune Kristy Laschober, at the Southern Oregon University library, played a key role in getting Oregon Senate Bill 713 passed.

SOU alum’s fight to pass SB 713 was personal

Kristy Laschober was an undergraduate student at Southern Oregon University in the spring of 2019 when a professor advised her, in the form of an assignment, to sign up for Twitter.

Laschober didn’t know much about the social media application but did as she was told. A short time later Noel Vest, a postdoctoral scholar in the Systems Neuroscience and Pain Lab at Stanford Medicine, sent Laschober a Twitter message: I see you were formerly incarcerated, he wrote. So was I, and I helped get a “ban the box” on college applications bill passed in Washington state. Interested in attempting the same in Oregon?

Laschober, 55, who was well acquainted with the feeling of anxiety associated with the box Vest had helped vanquish up north — the one prospective students must check had they been convicted of a crime — said yes, though she had no idea what that commitment really meant. That snap decision sparked a two-year crusade for Laschober that culminated June 15, when Oregon Gov. Kate Brown signed Senate Bill 713 into law.

The bill bans colleges from requiring prospective students from disclosing whether they’ve been convicted of a crime and requires post-secondary institutions to notify those applicants if their chosen course, apprenticeship, program, major or degree pathway is likely to lead to professional licensure requirements that may exclude those with criminal convictions.

Laschober had just returned from a run through the backwoods of Ashland when she received the good news. She was already feeling euphoric about life, about her path, about her work for the local nonprofit Reclaiming Lives/Recovery Café, and was reflecting on how much her life had changed since she was released from prison four years prior. Then came the email notification, alerting her that Brown had signed SB 713 into law.

“After that call I thought, wow, life is so amazing,” Laschober said. “It’s like, I’m running free, I was so full, and then I get home and I see the email that the governor signed and I just broke down, really out of gratitude. It still makes me emotional, just the hope.”

Laschober is very open about why SB 713 was so personal to her. Born with health issues, she became addicted to opioids early in life but kicked the habit for 10 years before relapsing as an adult. Things went from bad to worse when she was introduced to methamphetamines, and Laschober was busted in Las Vegas after trying to sell meth to a priest. At the time she was married to a narcotics officer. He had no idea.

“I was someone living two lives,” she said. “So when you try a drug like (meth), it pretty much takes over. Even though you think it won’t, it does.”

Her punishment was harsh for a first-time drug offender: five years in federal prison. She walked out in a little more than four years, in 2017, and moved to Ashland to be closer to her mom and sister. She was free but homeless, and quickly adapted to the struggle of rebuilding a life from the ground up. In her previous life, Laschober worked as a wardrobe stylist. After prison, she happily accepted a pair of jeans from a woman at the halfway house she was staying at.

“Trying to get a job in the rain with no car, with no house,” she said. “It was hopeless.”

But Laschober’s life took a sudden detour when she landed in U.S. District Court Judge Ann Aiken’s Reentry Court, a federal initiative that surrounds parolees with support services to help them successfully acclimate to life outside prison. Those who complete the 12-month program have one year shaved off their parole — Laschober had five years, so it seemed like a good deal to her.

Now, Laschober considers Aiken a mentor of sorts.

“What I found was so amazing there,” she said of Reentry Court. “(Aiken) said, why aren’t you in college? I said I did some college but I was sick a lot while I was doing it so I never finished. So she strongly urged me to go back.”

Laschober took that advice and in 2020 graduated from SOU summa cum laude. There was no criminal history box on the college application she filled out prior to enrolling at SOU, but the box was part of her scholarship applications, and the experience of being confronted with the question there, she said, is why she was able to speak passionately about the subject when it came time to push for the bill’s passage. The bill does not impact scholarship applications, but Laschober hopes that’s a change that’s also coming.

“Because you’re in this transparency living a life of integrity and doing great, and then you come to that box and you panic,” she said. “And really, statistics say 66% of people that come to that box and have a record, they don’t continue.”

Tackling the question on her scholarship applications, Laschober at first tried to explain her situation as best she could, but realized after several failed attempts that there are some life experiences that can’t be summed up in a few single-spaced lines on a form. She erased her first several tries before settling on a simple plea: “Please give me a chance.”

“And I thought, well, that really sucks to have to beg to have a chance,” she said. “And I have a lot of support. Most people in prison don’t have support, so the fact that they’re going out of their way to check that box without support — it’s shame, really, that takes over.”

That’s why Vest’s question sparked such an immediate response in Laschober. Over the next two years she learned all about the wheels of government, all the steps that must be taken to keep those wheels spinning and a bill alive. In between, COVID-19 complicated matters, but Laschober pressed on.

Already civically engaged and a student leader at SOU, Laschober was on a Zoom meeting with Sen. Michael Dembrow concerning higher education in prisons when the subject was first broached. She was surprised when Dembrow jumped on board — he ended up co-sponsoring the bill. Laschober also credited Rep. Pam Marsh, another co-sponsor, with helping to move the bill forward.

“We just kept it going,” Laschober said. “(Dembrow) got the bill written, and he was very kind in regard to sending me emails and text messages. That was surprising, that a senator would be so available in asking my thoughts on everything. I said, ‘Hey, can you do a Zoom with me and (Vest) and Shawn (Sorensen)?’ And he said, ‘Sure.’”

Sorensen, another former SOU student now pursuing his master’s at Portland State, also graduated from SOU in 2020 but didn’t meet Laschober until after Sorensen saw Vest at a national collegiate recovery conference in Boston. There, Vest spoke about the national “ban the box” movement and introduced Sorensen to Laschober, and that’s how the two wound up lobbying for the bill together in Salem.

“(Laschober) was definitely the driving force and was able to sustain a lot of the communication with representatives over the last year,” Sorensen said.

Sorensen had a personal stake in the bill, too — several felony convictions that created a mental block when he arrived at the question on the Common App, an undergraduate college application through which prospective students can apply to more than 900 colleges and universities. He would go on to work as a program assistant for SOU’s Community of Recovery in Education (CORE) program, but back when he was still working on turning his life around Sorensen stopped filling out the Common App when he arrived at the convicted-of-a-crime box.

Laschober’s tenacity and passion helped get her in the door in Salem, but she still needed a map to negotiate the maze of state government. For that, she turned to Jeanne Stallman, SOU’s associate vice president for government and corporate relations. Stallman agreed to meet Laschober at an Ashland coffee shop downtown and, after hearing Laschober’s plan, offered to explain the ins and outs of Oregon government.

Those lessons went on for months. When Laschober needed to know what to do next, she often went to Stallman first. And like most senate bills, there were a lot of nexts when it came to SB 713. The bill was introduced with a first reading Jan. 22. Then came a public hearing, then a work session, amendments, a second reading and so on. The third reading, held June 2, passed the House with a 31-20 vote, and five days later it squeaked through the Senate, 16-13.

Stallman said the work that went into the bill is, to her, part of what makes SOU a special place.

“What struck me about it was just being delighted and proud of Kristy as our alum, for her starting this issue and being ready and willing to step up and put her own work into it,” Stallman said, “because that’s, I think, something we do particularly well at SOU, we pride ourselves in. It’s in our mission. We prepare graduates to be civically engaged in a democracy, and here she was stepping up and doing it.”

To Laschober, SB 713 represents a second chance for so many ex-felons like her who are ready and willing to do the work it takes to turn their lives around. She doles out the credit liberally. It was a team effort, she says, and one that required a lot of work and bipartisan support for a subject that wasn’t likely to receive a lot of headlines. But, she says, it was well worth it.

“People can complain about a million things,” she said, “but what are you doing to make a difference? I just felt so much hope for myself and for all the other people who have been in prison.”

Joe Zavala can be reached at 541-821-0829 or jzavala@rosebudmedia.com.

Adblock test (Why?)

Source

There is a widespread concern among conservatives that the U.S. is not doing enough to prevent criminality. In fact, GOP politicians have been explicit about their belief that we are not sufficiently supporting law enforcement’s effort to put criminals behind bars. Funding is undoubtedly essential to deter crime and maintain order. Any conversation about rising violence, however, must address that over 80 percent of the people released from prison eventually reenter the system. To truly make our communities safer, we must find a way to integrate those returning to society from state and local jails.

Both progressives and conservatives levy a broad range of criticisms against the judicial system. While these critiques may be valid, it’s difficult for either party to openly discuss our shockingly high recidivism rate. Conservative commentators often argue that a cultural shift is needed for any lasting change to be made. This argument rings somewhat hollow, though, especially when it’s made by bombastic personalities who are unfamiliar with the difficulties that ex-cons face.

Progressives, for their part, are more vocal about the holistic failures of the criminal-justice system. Democratic politicians have stridently championed criminal-justice-system reforms, such as defunding the police or getting rid of private prisons. Yet such solutions are rarely productive. Criminality is not statistically lower in major Democratic strongholds, nor are their recidivism rates depressed.

We ought to abandon our partisan goggles and grapple earnestly with how our society treats those who leave our nation’s prisons. The answer isn’t a happy one. First, the emotional toll of being locked away for years is significant. Some former inmates leave and cannot navigate public transportation, feel claustrophobic in large crowds, and have difficulties tending to their daily routine.

In the words of an inmate who reentered society,

You are not used to people being up on you and bumping you. Your defenses are up. People in the street are more disrespectful than the people who were in jail. People step on your sneakers, they push you. . . . In jail, people say, ‘Excuse me.’ Everybody knows their place. Here, nobody knows their places. So it was very uncomfortable, I was just afraid to go get on the train all by myself and go to Queens. It literally took me three days before I could travel.

To make matters worse, finding work with a rap sheet can be nearly impossible. Having a record haunts convicts for years after getting out. We all intuitively know that it’s more difficult to get a job as an ex-con, but the numbers are staggering. According to the Harvard Business Review, white Americans with a criminal record get a callback for a job interview only around 15 percent of the time. For black Americans, that number drops to 5 percent. So many formerly incarcerated people cannot find work, the effect can be felt in macroeconomic employment rates.

Just walking through a prison door can ruin a person’s life. That goes for police officers, too. A new book, Breaking Blue, authored by Sean “Sticks” Larson, a former Tulsa police officer, reveals how officers have had their lives wrecked with false accusations.

Larson reports that a police officer, Scott Hornoff, was falsely accused of murder and spent six years in prison before being released. He was released only because the actual killer confessed out of moral guilt. When Hornoff returned to American society, he was left penniless and without employment. Attorney fees and alimony payments to his wife who had divorced him over his conviction absorbed all of his back pay. Forced into early retirement, former officer Hornoff couldn’t find a job; eventually, he found employment overseas in Afghanistan.

To restate, a person in a position of community authority was falsely accused of murder. When he was publicly vindicated and allowed to reenter American society as a free and innocent man, America wouldn’t take him back. The accusation, the prison time itself, was enough to make him radioactive. Later on in the book, Hornoff says, “When an exoneree gets out, there is nothing. It’s basically ‘there’s the door.’”

Scott Hornoff is not the only one who has lost his life to this system. A report from the Prison Policy Institute found that former prisoners are ten times more likely to be homeless than is the general public. In a separate report, the PPI found that the median income for former prisoners who find jobs is under $20,000 a year. Does this sound like a system of rehabilitation?

There are no easy solutions, and we deceive ourselves by simply blaming “the other side” for our issues. A successful plan would need to break the vicious feedback loop between employers who don’t want to hire former criminals and ex-cons put into situations where crime is the only option. One radical solution is to provide temporary income to those leaving prisons to help rehabilitate their lives. Aggressively pursuing probationary programs is a more modest proposal.

Any discussion of rising crime, particularly in cities, must address the truly staggering scale of the reentry problem. As Larson writes in his book:

Too often we view justice as a load of punishments doled out hard. That’s not the intent of the system. It’s supposed to rehabilitate people. To show them the errors they made and get them back on their feet so they can become contributing members of society. If we miss that part, we miss everything.

Federalism is the laboratory of democracy, and local governments should take ambitious steps on this issue. Maybe paying prisoners to stay out of trouble is a good idea; perhaps it isn’t. Skills training may work, but it could also fail. We don’t know yet, but even if these programs don’t produce results, their failures will pale in comparison to our unacceptable status quo. If our prisons are meant to be rehabilitative, then we ought not give up our fellow Americans merely because they went through that process. It’s not fair to them or to the victims of repeat criminals.

Adblock test (Why?)

Source

Jamie Lusch / Mail TribuneKristy Laschober, at the Southern Oregon University library, played a key role in getting Oregon Senate Bill 713 passed.

SOU alum’s fight to pass SB 713 was personal

Kristy Laschober was an undergraduate student at Southern Oregon University in the spring of 2019 when a professor advised her, in the form of an assignment, to sign up for Twitter.

Laschober didn’t know much about the social media application but did as she was told. A short time later Noel Vest, a postdoctoral scholar in the Systems Neuroscience and Pain Lab at Stanford Medicine, sent Laschober a Twitter message: I see you were formerly incarcerated, he wrote. So was I, and I helped get a “ban the box” on college applications bill passed in Washington state. Interested in attempting the same in Oregon?

Laschober, 55, who was well acquainted with the feeling of anxiety associated with the box Vest had helped vanquish up north — the one prospective students must check had they been convicted of a crime — said yes, though she had no idea what that commitment really meant. That snap decision sparked a two-year crusade for Laschober that culminated June 15, when Oregon Gov. Kate Brown signed Senate Bill 713 into law.

The bill bans colleges from requiring prospective students from disclosing whether they’ve been convicted of a crime and requires post-secondary institutions to notify those applicants if their chosen course, apprenticeship, program, major or degree pathway is likely to lead to professional licensure requirements that may exclude those with criminal convictions.

Laschober had just returned from a run through the backwoods of Ashland when she received the good news. She was already feeling euphoric about life, about her path, about her work for the local nonprofit Reclaiming Lives/Recovery Café, and was reflecting on how much her life had changed since she was released from prison four years prior. Then came the email notification, alerting her that Brown had signed SB 713 into law.

“After that call I thought, wow, life is so amazing,” Laschober said. “It’s like, I’m running free, I was so full, and then I get home and I see the email that the governor signed and I just broke down, really out of gratitude. It still makes me emotional, just the hope.”

Laschober is very open about why SB 713 was so personal to her. Born with health issues, she became addicted to opioids early in life but kicked the habit for 10 years before relapsing as an adult. Things went from bad to worse when she was introduced to methamphetamines, and Laschober was busted in Las Vegas after trying to sell meth to a priest. At the time she was married to a narcotics officer. He had no idea.

“I was someone living two lives,” she said. “So when you try a drug like (meth), it pretty much takes over. Even though you think it won’t, it does.”

Her punishment was harsh for a first-time drug offender: five years in federal prison. She walked out in a little more than four years, in 2017, and moved to Ashland to be closer to her mom and sister. She was free but homeless, and quickly adapted to the struggle of rebuilding a life from the ground up. In her previous life, Laschober worked as a wardrobe stylist. After prison, she happily accepted a pair of jeans from a woman at the halfway house she was staying at.

“Trying to get a job in the rain with no car, with no house,” she said. “It was hopeless.”

But Laschober’s life took a sudden detour when she landed in U.S. District Court Judge Ann Aiken’s Reentry Court, a federal initiative that surrounds parolees with support services to help them successfully acclimate to life outside prison. Those who complete the 12-month program have one year shaved off their parole — Laschober had five years, so it seemed like a good deal to her.

Now, Laschober considers Aiken a mentor of sorts.

“What I found was so amazing there,” she said of Reentry Court. “(Aiken) said, why aren’t you in college? I said I did some college but I was sick a lot while I was doing it so I never finished. So she strongly urged me to go back.”

Laschober took that advice and in 2020 graduated from SOU summa cum laude. There was no criminal history box on the college application she filled out prior to enrolling at SOU, but the box was part of her scholarship applications, and the experience of being confronted with the question there, she said, is why she was able to speak passionately about the subject when it came time to push for the bill’s passage. The bill does not impact scholarship applications, but Laschober hopes that’s a change that’s also coming.

“Because you’re in this transparency living a life of integrity and doing great, and then you come to that box and you panic,” she said. “And really, statistics say 66% of people that come to that box and have a record, they don’t continue.”

Tackling the question on her scholarship applications, Laschober at first tried to explain her situation as best she could, but realized after several failed attempts that there are some life experiences that can’t be summed up in a few single-spaced lines on a form. She erased her first several tries before settling on a simple plea: “Please give me a chance.”

“And I thought, well, that really sucks to have to beg to have a chance,” she said. “And I have a lot of support. Most people in prison don’t have support, so the fact that they’re going out of their way to check that box without support — it’s shame, really, that takes over.”

That’s why Vest’s question sparked such an immediate response in Laschober. Over the next two years she learned all about the wheels of government, all the steps that must be taken to keep those wheels spinning and a bill alive. In between, COVID-19 complicated matters, but Laschober pressed on.

Already civically engaged and a student leader at SOU, Laschober was on a Zoom meeting with Sen. Michael Dembrow concerning higher education in prisons when the subject was first broached. She was surprised when Dembrow jumped on board — he ended up co-sponsoring the bill. Laschober also credited Rep. Pam Marsh, another co-sponsor, with helping to move the bill forward.

“We just kept it going,” Laschober said. “(Dembrow) got the bill written, and he was very kind in regard to sending me emails and text messages. That was surprising, that a senator would be so available in asking my thoughts on everything. I said, ‘Hey, can you do a Zoom with me and (Vest) and Shawn (Sorensen)?’ And he said, ‘Sure.’”

Sorensen, another former SOU student now pursuing his master’s at Portland State, also graduated from SOU in 2020 but didn’t meet Laschober until after Sorensen saw Vest at a national collegiate recovery conference in Boston. There, Vest spoke about the national “ban the box” movement and introduced Sorensen to Laschober, and that’s how the two wound up lobbying for the bill together in Salem.

“(Laschober) was definitely the driving force and was able to sustain a lot of the communication with representatives over the last year,” Sorensen said.

Sorensen had a personal stake in the bill, too — several felony convictions that created a mental block when he arrived at the question on the Common App, an undergraduate college application through which prospective students can apply to more than 900 colleges and universities. He would go on to work as a program assistant for SOU’s Community of Recovery in Education (CORE) program, but back when he was still working on turning his life around Sorensen stopped filling out the Common App when he arrived at the convicted-of-a-crime box.

Laschober’s tenacity and passion helped get her in the door in Salem, but she still needed a map to negotiate the maze of state government. For that, she turned to Jeanne Stallman, SOU’s associate vice president for government and corporate relations. Stallman agreed to meet Laschober at an Ashland coffee shop downtown and, after hearing Laschober’s plan, offered to explain the ins and outs of Oregon government.

Those lessons went on for months. When Laschober needed to know what to do next, she often went to Stallman first. And like most senate bills, there were a lot of nexts when it came to SB 713. The bill was introduced with a first reading Jan. 22. Then came a public hearing, then a work session, amendments, a second reading and so on. The third reading, held June 2, passed the House with a 31-20 vote, and five days later it squeaked through the Senate, 16-13.

Stallman said the work that went into the bill is, to her, part of what makes SOU a special place.

“What struck me about it was just being delighted and proud of Kristy as our alum, for her starting this issue and being ready and willing to step up and put her own work into it,” Stallman said, “because that’s, I think, something we do particularly well at SOU, we pride ourselves in. It’s in our mission. We prepare graduates to be civically engaged in a democracy, and here she was stepping up and doing it.”

To Laschober, SB 713 represents a second chance for so many ex-felons like her who are ready and willing to do the work it takes to turn their lives around. She doles out the credit liberally. It was a team effort, she says, and one that required a lot of work and bipartisan support for a subject that wasn’t likely to receive a lot of headlines. But, she says, it was well worth it.

“People can complain about a million things,” she said, “but what are you doing to make a difference? I just felt so much hope for myself and for all the other people who have been in prison.”

Joe Zavala can be reached at 541-821-0829 or jzavala@rosebudmedia.com.

Adblock test (Why?)

Source

<!– SHOW ARTICLE

[unable to retrieve full-text content]

New Alabama law could make it easier for reformed criminals to get jobs  FOX10 News

Source

Written By ESR News Blog Editor Thomas Ahearn

On April 13, 2021, the City Council in DeSoto, Texas approved a “Ban the Box” hiring policy “to give everyone a fair chance at employment” by “removing the conviction history check-box from job applications. If employers must ask about convictions, they can ask later in the hiring process,” the North Dallas Gazette (NDG) reported.

“Ban the Box is a commonsense policy that aims to remove job barriers for people with records. DeSoto is joining hundreds of other cities and counties in implementing this policy to shift hiring practices so that we focus more on qualifications and less on something that happened in the past,” City Council Member Candice Quarles told NDG.

As of April 2021, 36 states and more than 150 cities and counties have Ban the Box laws so a job applicant’s qualifications may be viewed without the stigma of a criminal record, according to the National Employment Law Project (NELP). In Texas, Austin, Dallas County, DeSoto, San Antonio, and Travis County passed Ban the Box laws.

Ban the Box laws and second chance programs that help allow ex-offenders with a prior criminal record an opportunity to find work will continue to evolve, according to leading global background check firm Employment Screening Resources® (ESR), which compiled the “ESR Top Ten Background Check Trends” for 2021.

ESR founder and Chief Executive Officer (CEO) Attorney Lester Rosen and ESR Vice President of Strategic Growth Dawn Standerwick will host a webinar titled “ESR Top Ten Background Check Trends for 2021” on Wednesday, April 21, 2021, from 11:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. Pacific Time. To register for the webinar, click here.

Employment Screening Resources® (ESR) – which was ranked the #1 screening firm in 2020 by HRO Today – offers a white paper on “Ten Critical Steps for Ex-Offenders to Get Back into the Workforce,” an “ESR Ban the Box Resource Guide,” and a Ban the Box Resource Page. To learn more about ESR, visit www.esrcheck.com.

NOTE: Employment Screening Resources® (ESR) does not
provide or offer legal services or legal advice of any kind or nature. Any
information on this website is for educational purposes only.

© 2021 Employment Screening Resources® (ESR) – Making copies of or using any part of the ESR News Blog or ESR website for any purpose other than your own personal use is prohibited unless written authorization is first obtained from ESR.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Source

United States:

New York City Expands Protections Under Its Ban The Box Law For Applicants And Employees

06 April 2021

Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith LLP

To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Source