So I just discovered that I have been working next to the waste of oxygen that raped my best friend several years ago. I work in a manufacturing environment and I know that you can’t fire someone just for being a sex offender unless it directly interferes with work duties (in the US). But despite it being a primarily male workforce he does work with several women who have no idea what he is. He literally followed a woman home, broke into her house, and raped her. Him working here puts every female employee at risk. How is that not an unsafe working environment? How is it at even legal to employ him anywhere where he will have contact with women?

  • TomAwsm@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    “Nothing was done to rehabilitate them, so rehabilitation doesn’t work.”

    There’s literally no logic here…

    • lightnsfw@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      18
      ·
      9 months ago

      If nothing was done to rehabilitate them, then they are not rehabilitated. How does that not track?

      • TomAwsm@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        It doesn’t track when the argument is that they should be rehabilitated rather than just locked away.

        • lightnsfw@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          9 months ago

          I never said they shouldn’t be, assuming they can be. What I said was if they are not, don’t let them out. Currently there is very little rehabilitation going on and those who are released are still a danger. This is not a good thing. If you don’t fix the rehabilitation problem first all you get are repeat offenders. Releasing un-rehabilitated criminals < locking them up forever < rehabilitation.