[BDSM-LegalIssues] Re: New book -- good but disturbing>>>
--- In BDSM-LegalIssues@
<sandmanbrian777@
> Yes I agree about procedures and "proper legal authority" However
> the informal network of contacts from ex-police and government
> Investigators allows a background check that by bypasses the
> formal rules.
For a LEO to improperly use NCIC for something outside an official
police investigation, is a felony. There is plenty of access to
public records, however. Public records belong to the people, and
arguably should be accessible. We can argue about "how accessible."
> His theory was that evryone breaks the law by going about their
> daily activities, even Law Enforcement Officers (LEO). There is a
> manual for Investigative Journalists which sites a rule "there is
> dirt on everyone its just a question of digging it up"
That is a completely different situation. If you have the
Investigative Press hounding you, you're in some sort of deep spit,
perhaps invented by the evil press, but deep spit nonetheless.
Personally, I don't think I could afford to hire or retain someone
who is so controversial. And there's not much any Law can do about
that. If it is deemed to be a significant enough business or
personal risk, I'd consider terminating numerous innocent people to
cover my tracks. It's better than having to close the business and
fire everyone. Even that is better than being taken to the cleaners
in a negligence suit.
I've seen what happens when it is difficult, for legal reasons, to
fire people, as is common for many reasons in Europe. I've worked
in those scenarios. One answer is to hire fewer people. You limit
your growth, and thus everyone's growth, by playing conservatively.
Another is to employ contract workers. You rent them by the day
from body shops. Any hint of a problem, and their slavetrader gets
a phone call and they're gone. This was, and probably still is,
commonly done in the UK, even for professionals. I've worked as a
professional, for a slave trader <cough> er, contract worker shop,
here in the US.
One thing that is driving the expansion of background
investigations, is the threat of "negligent hiring" lawsuits. If
you hire a bad apple and, say, they assault a co worker or run over
a pedestrian while drunk in the company car (or many lesser things),
you are potentially liable for hiring them if it could have been
determined that they were a risk. Now, I'd like to severely curtail
the rights of people to sue, but that's a different knife fight, and
one that ain't gonna happen soon.
The employer must be given a certain amount of discretion, and must
be assumed to use a certain amount of brains. Overly circumscribe
it, and you're destroying the very freedoms you're trying to protect.
BTW, I am active in the BDSM lifestyle, and have an arrest and
acquittal record, so I am potentially at risk from overly
conservative employers.
- Dennis
--
The objection to Puritans is not that they try to
make us think as they do, but that they try to make
us do as they think.
-H.L.Mencken
Post message: BDSM-LegalIssues@onelist.com
Subscribe: BDSM-LegalIssues-subscribe@onelist.com
Unsubscribe: BDSM-LegalIssues-unsubscribe@onelist.com
List owner: BDSM-LegalIssues-owner@onelist.com
Shortcut URL to this page:
http://www.onelist.com/community/BDSM-LegalIssues
Earn your degree in as few as 2 years - Advance your career with an AS, BS, MS degree - College-Finder.net.
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format to Traditional
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe
__,_._,___
posted by Annja Sue at
7:01 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home