Delicious LiveJournal Links for 7-16-2009

[andrewducker]

• Killings are lowest in 20 years
  Overall crime is down by 5% and violent crime has fallen by 6%, and gun crime has seen a 17% fall. Rape is up, as is burglary and mugging/picking pockets.
  (tags: crime UK)
• Ireland outlaws blasphemy
  Gah!
  (tags: ireland law religion blasphemy)
• Sense and Sensibility and Sea Monsters
  From the people that brought you Pride And Prejudice and Zombies...
  (tags: funny book JaneAusten)
• When people complain about needing a criminal records check before being allowed to work with children
  Get them to read this...
  (tags: Child_abuse children law UK crime)
• X-Men Universe Relationship Map
  Dashed line indicates one of the parties is from an Alternate Universe
  (tags: comics relationships funny comic xmen visualization)
• Just what is a big salary?
  Which tells me the figures on my poll are for people who are paid normal salaries - and doesn't include self-employed people (i.e. contractors and the like). Read the comments - and feel your brain melt!
  (tags: money statistics)
• Researchers use light to move physical objects
  A team of Yale University researchers has discovered a repulsive light force that can be used to control components on silicon microchips, meaning future nanodevices could be controlled by light rather than electricity.
  (tags: light physics science)
• The myth of the chemical cure
  A mental health expert talks about psychiatric drugs and what they really do. Hint - they don't fix you, they put you in an altered state that you may prefer to your natural one.
  (tags: depression bbc psychology drugs serotonin health)

Comments

[andrewducker]

You're checking the register to see if the person has been found guilty in the past.

[broin.livejournal.com]

Why is there an assumption the person needs checking?

[broin.livejournal.com]

Or to put it another way, I worked in a financial department of a large, governmental organisation. There were no background checks to see if I tended to nick things.

[andrewducker]

I had to tell my employers about any "unspent" convictions I had. It was on the job application form. Did you not?

[endless-psych.livejournal.com]

Well they took it on trust that you would tell them. I doubt many, if any, employer (outside of certain occupations) actually bothers to check.

[broin.livejournal.com]

That's different to being checked. I didn't have to pay anyone to prove to the world I was honest.

[andrewducker]

Aaah, that I can see as a problem. I'd be more in favour of the employer paying, obviously.

[channelpenguin.livejournal.com]

in my experience, they do. I've had all sorts of checks run on me by various investment banks. They pay.

[broin.livejournal.com]

From The Reg:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/07/17/crb_enhanced_vetting_trouble/comments/

"I help run a childrens drama group and we will need to spend ~£640 to get our adult helpers registered under the new scheme, where will we get the money from?"

[andrewducker]

Tough. If they're going to be spending a lot of time with kids then they need to be checked. If they need to put their prices up then that's life.

[ninebelow.livejournal.com]

I'm surprised. I work in a large, governmental organisation and I had to undergo many background checks.

[andrewducker]

Because nobody who has been found guilty of abusing children is allowed to work with them. Therefore checking the big list of people who have been found guilty is the obvious thing to do. I don't see how that's an assumption of guilt.

[endless-psych.livejournal.com]

You are checking the list to see if someone is on it, in case they are a child abuser, ergo there must be an assumption (or if not an assumption a mechanism of sorts) that they might be guilty.

While not an assumption of guilt it doesn't sit entirely comfortably with the principle of assumption of innocence.

[andrewducker]

They have detectors in HMV in case you're trying to walk out with a stolen DVD. That's not an assumption of innocence either, but I also don't have a problem with that.

[broin.livejournal.com]

How about if you had to deposit 50 quid on the way in?

[endless-psych.livejournal.com]

That is a good point, the only difference I would state is that the detectors are an essentially passive means of catching shoplifters out. They don't intrude on anyone elses personal lifes a CRB check is conciously carried out, it's not passive and it is (to an extent) invasive.

To be a little reducto ad absurdum (sp?) you could also state that doors (at least locked ones) also indicate the lack of an assumption of innocence. It also allows me to ask when is a door not a door?

When it's turning in to a field!

I have no real issue with CRB checks (I might if it was shown that they don't do all that much in real terms) however I do acknowledge that it's a touch "iffy" when it regards some of my socially liberal views and ethical standpoints. Certainly not enough for me to believe I have some arbitary cut off for where the presumption of innocence no longer matters but enough to make me a touch uncomfortable if I think about the competing ethics of it all.

Your mileage may differ of course.

[andrewducker]

I feel much the same way. I don't like checking up on people, I prefer to trust them. But it does seem like this is an instance where that doesn't work.

I'd be fascinated to see some data on how often someone is caught by this.

[endless-psych.livejournal.com]

I suspect that if probationary services were better this wouldn't actually be needed. It's never gonna catch first time offenders afterall.

Although that brings up another ethical dilemma should "certain people" be watched by the state to protect the rest of us.

Like I said minefield ;)

(I'll have a looksee at some point to see if there is any data on this)

[a-pawson.livejournal.com]

A CRB check isn't exactly invasive. Your prospective employer rights off to the relevent agency, and gets a letter back saying yay or nay.

The only ways I can see it may be considered invasive are 1) you have to sign the form to give consent, and 2) it may delay you starting work while it is carried out.

[endless-psych.livejournal.com]

It's more invasive then security detectors at HMV anyway! ;)

I count acess to personal data about me to be reasonably invasive, giving consent obviously takes the edge off quite a fair bit, that said I would consider (as a non-criminal record type person) that any data they held about me would also be invasive.

It's a bitch waiting for clearance.

[a-pawson.livejournal.com]

I think we have different attitudes to personal data storage. I couldn't care less if my name sits on a database somewhere saying I have no criminal convictions.

The waiting time I can imagine is a problem, but hopefully efforts are being made to speed up the process.

[a-pawson.livejournal.com]

I don't think there is such an assumption. In fact the assumption is probably that the person is OK from initial interviews etc.

However, the reasoning is that the repercussions of allowing someone through, who is on the register, are so great that not checking everyone becomes a risk the organisation cannot take.