View Single Post
Old 07-17-2011, 10:50 AM   #8
JoeRedskin
Contains football related knowledge
 
JoeRedskin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Second Star On The Right
Age: 62
Posts: 10,401
Re: S.F. weighs protecting ex-cons seeking homes, jobs

Quote:
Originally Posted by Daseal View Post
I don't think this is a bad idea. We know that our current "rehabilitation" programs fail miserably. A lot of people that get out of jail are discriminated against, unable to find jobs/etc, and turn to crime to try to stay afloat.

I love how the apartment leaser tries to frame it as a financial issue. If you had adequate financial data you wouldn't NEED to see their criminal report. Financial data and ability to make rent shouldn't have anything to do with convictions. As they said in the article, violent criminals and sex offenders aren't covered for this, just the guys in jail for non-violent crimes.
Sorry, gotta disagree. The only thing that makes renting a viable option for small time renters (not complexes or such) is a good tenant and being a good tenant requires more than the mere abiltiy to pay the rent. It means someone who can be trusted to reliably pay timely and who will treat property respectfully and not use it for criminal activities.

Past criminal (even non-violent) behavior is important to me. You have six arrests for possesion, I want proof you have properly rehabilitated before I let you take control of my property. Otherwise, I risk damage ot the property that more than likely will not be covered by the security deposit - unless I make the security deposit prohibitive. Alternatively, I risk missed rent as you pay for bail on your seventh arrest. Further, if I am renting a room in my house, I want to know who is in it.

Before I let someone onto my property or turn over immediate control of that valuable property to them, I want to know all about those things that reflect on how they may use that property as well as if they can pay for it.

Making ex criminals a "protected class" for civil rights issues confers wayyyy too many benefits upon them. Sorry, if they have suffered discrimanation it is b/c of their past actions/decisions not b/c of some immutable characteristic such as race or gender.
__________________
Strap it up, hold onto the ball, and let’s go.
JoeRedskin is offline   Reply With Quote

Advertisements
 
Page generated in 0.80174 seconds with 10 queries