Sexual Predators (mature topic)

[the_pleasure_is_mine]

Well, it's personal opinion but if said person did it with said child consensually and the child did not feel scarred or abused/used later in life and it was consensual at the time, the law might frown upon it but I have no issue with them.

i.e, no harm no foul. But I do not condone molestation. The people that manipulate children or outright abuse them like that have no support from me.

[sub]This might not be the best place to talk about this.[/sub]

I would think generally a girl that young is inexcusable.

Yes it makes it marginally better if the girl was in essence okay with it. (In the same way that it's marginally better to suffer a few hours of torture if at they end you're given a candy bar)

But someone that young cannot give informed consent.

That saying I'd still hire the guy, he made his mistakes, not many people would be willing to give him a second chance but I would.

Though I suppose around the ages of 12 and above the lines seem to blur...

I know 12 year olds with more sexual experience than most of my friends and I...

Edit: fixed the messed up quoting.

 

[guntotingtomcat]

Probably. I would keep an eye on him though.
His presence might actually attract customers.

 

[aPod]

Well, the problem that could come up is wether or not you would be liable, god forbid, something were to happen while he was employed by you. If that is the case you, the employer, have more to consider than just that this guy was a sex offender.

Personally, it all depends. Does the guy deserve a shot, sure. With some consideration.

 

[ramboondiea]

i probably wouldn't hire him, having an allege sex offender employed would likely be bad for business, also if i did hire a sex offender that could effect the moral of other employees,, and could also but them and my self in danger from the violent 'vigilantes' in the area

 

[Cartman2nd]

I'd hire him.

If I see even a hint of a leer towards a kid, he's hitting the biting the curb.

I wouldn't hire him. These are people that shouldn't exist, so I'm not going to acknowledge him.

 

[thingymuwatsit]

I would hire him on a trial period of eight months wherein if he does the slightest thing wrong, he loses the job, after that he can go on as a regular employee.

 

[magicmonkeybars]

I wouldn't because I depend on the public's perception for my business and people don't buy things from a sexual predator.
As much as I'd like to help this one person I still have to think of the health and well being of my store other employees and my own income rather than the well being of one individual perhaps unfairly singled out by society.

 

[Bloodastral]

I'd say no just for the nature of the crime. He was sentenced, he's guilty. That and the fact his working at my store might damage business.

 

[floppylobster]

If you're in tune with it, people like that exude a certain 'vibe', and that just really bothers me. So, no, I wouldn't hire him. There's a guy who comes into my video store. Every week he rents some sort of torture porn or movie about a girl who is kidnapped and abused (there are a surprising amount of videos about this). And every week I catch him eyeing up any pretty girl who happens to be in the store. I can't stand that lack of self control. It's an indication of personality problems, that no matter how good he is at his job, I just don't want to work with him. I hold no direct grudge against him because I don't know the full details, but I wish him well and send him on his way.

 

[adderseal]

I don't hire him. I can't take a risk I'm not prepared to cover the consequences of.

 

[SilverUchiha]

Of course. Sex predator or not, he's good at the job. It isn't my responsibility if he does something wrong. I'm sure my opinion might change if I had kids of my own, but at this current point in time, not a concern.

 

[Specter_]

No questions asked = no hire, convicted or not. A basic background-check is a must-do for all hires.

If during that background check a conviction comes up, it should be looked into and analyzed.
That being said, it depends on how and why he was convicted:
Did he have consensual sex with a 16-year old when he was 18? No problem there.
Did he molest a 5-year old? Fuck that guy.
Was it a quick-and-dirty-conviction? Look into it a bit more, then decide.
Was there a deal involved for someone else? Look into it a bit more, then decide.
Was the attorney looking for a high convition-rate? Look into it a bit more, then decide.

 

[kikon9]

Yes, I would hire him. One bad thing doesn't condemn him.

 

[DanielDeFig]

I would hire him based on his excellent resume. People can change, and his criminal past has nothing to do with his new job. People should have the right to get a job based purely on their professional merits, not including unrelated past events.

On the other hand, if he has a personality that i simply can't stand (possibly related to criminal past), then i wouldn't hire him. But that would be because i'd know we wouldn't be able to work well together if we constantly kept clashing (not good for business or either of our healths).

 

[Lord_Nemesis]

Depends on the person hiring. Professionalism or personal morales. Personally, I would hire him. It's a shity world and most of us become shity to survive. Dog-eatdog as they say. I am one of those people. I don't believe in providing aid to Africa or helping them grow, sending a certain super power's armed forces to take out a certain warlord in a certain African country and to what affect. Friendlies dead, locals dead and finally warlord taken out, few months later another one pops up. Pointless and watsed blood spilled.

Anyway, back to the question: Yes, I would hire him. I'm not hiring him to look after children or be a saint. I am hiring him to work as a tech dude, which he can do, very well. I look after me and my own. Couldn't give a fuck about anyone else, he comes after my kids, he dies, other than that, it's the other kids parents problem.

 

[Tiscolfo]

never ever ever, Hell i dont care if the guy is qualified and just convicted I have a problem with rapists, very lowly and crap in the head, I would believe in the death penalty for it if wasnt for people shouting rape when It didnt actually happen. but with children Im pretty sure he did it unless there was another guy with his sperm sample

 

[The Stonker]

Why not? There are loads of people that are framed for sexual assault.
So why not?

 

[gibboss28]

You are now given a choice, you may not ask any questions to Joe regarding his past. You must choose if you hire him on the spot, or if you don't hire him at all. Do you hire him?

If I'm unable to ask questions, and added to the fact I don't know all the details, added to the fact the the guys been arrested for sexually assaulting a child and everyone's been notified about this...

Then my answer is no.

Its all well and good giving the benefit of the doubt if your looking at this from the point of view of a person.

But from a business point of view? There is no way this could do anything but harm your business and in turn your livelihood.

And then there's also this:

And have my premises fire-bombed? No thanks.

 

[Kroxile]

Everyone deserves a second chance. I'd hire him as long as he does his job satisfactorily.

People's personal lives have no place in the workplace and if what they do in their own time gets them in trouble it isn't my problem.

 

[Israirie]

Seeing as the job has nothing to do with children and everyone makes mistakes in their lives, I'd hire him. Whatever untold damage that he has caused the child will not be repaired through vengeance and spite. He is far more likely to return to this kind of behavior if he is ousted by the community and feels he will never be thought of as anything other than a child molester.

And frankly, it's not our job to continue to punish criminals after they have fairly served their sentences.