Criminal Records - What's the point?

I've been contemplating criminal records and my question is, what benefits do they offer Australian society? Do they not simply limit individuals who have just been penalized for committing a crime from entering the workforce? Without employment, how are people expected to provide for themselves? Crime. That's crime with a capital "C". Criminal Records - What's the point?

I understand that it might be considered "safer" for people to know if someone has committed a crime in the past, but we have registers that capture all of that information. For example, there is a violent offenders register and a sexual offenders register. So, why do we persist in making life more difficult for those who are already at a disadvantage, a disadvantage that most of us can't even fathom?

I've mentioned it before, and I'll mention it again, no one chooses a life of crime willingly. What happens is, life becomes extremely challenging, even uncontrollable; one might be battling addiction, or dealing with an unexpected child, everything seems insurmountable and committing a crime is often the only plausible way out of imminent peril.

When you have no real options, every idea suddenly becomes a good idea, and you find yourself doing things you never imagined possible. The problem is, once you realise you can get away with something, it's not as difficult to keep at it. A once off act of desperation becomes criminal activity in the blink of an eye.

Someone I really respect dealt drugs for a time. He was working long hours in a relatively low paid job and his boss was terrible at paying him is salary. Eventually late payments became lost payments and he was ten thousands dollars behind. What do you do when your boss has no money for you on pay day? Not much.

My mate continued working for months without any pay. His boss would throw him a couple of hundred dollars here and there, but the debt kept piling up on him. He had no money for rent and no money for food. He had no options. It can take months to get onto Centerlink payments. His only option was to find another way to make some money. He had a contact that could give him a great price on gear, and he could offer better deals to his mates who were getting from other places. Sadly, his act of desperation is considered a crime. The truth that nobody will admit is that every single person would make the same decision that he made. He was hungry, he knew he was months behind in his rent and there were no other legitimate options. He had to generate funds somehow, the only option available to him was an option that society frowns upon. I believe that it was his only option,

As I noted earlier, when you are in it, committing crime, you become comfortable and it's difficult to stop. You forget that what you are doing is against the law and just keep doing what you do. Time passes and all of a sudden you realise that it's been years.

Then, the crime itself can become more addictive than anything else. Let me explain. Drugs are the most common reason people are short of money and also a major reason they get involved in crime in the first place. The act of dealing drugs can be more addictive than the drugs themselves. Heaps of people have told me this over the years. Why? Your phone is always ringing, people are always happy to see you, people want to do favors for you, you are always really busy with really important stuff to do, people hang around so you are always in company, there is huge adrenalin involved in picking up supply, plus, every decision you make is really important, it's life or death stuff, and that's really exciting.

Then, the minute you stop. it's "crickets". The phone doesn't ring, nobody is around. You are suddenly alone, and it's really difficult to handle.

Stopping is close to impossible, especially if you are a good at it. You become friends with your customers and they struggle to find a new supplier who is reliable, and doesn't rip them off. Then the price they are paying is jacked up on them and they know that you can organize a cheaper deal for them. They have no problem asking. The drug world is dangerous, someone might be violently attacked by a new supplier and they tell you the story like it's your fault they were assaulted. You might have obligations to serious players who put threats on the table when you tell them that you want out of the business you had going on with them. If you are a former dealer that still has addiction issues, people close to you will ask you to help them out because it makes their life easier. They will have no consideration for the fact you are trying to get out of the game. Drug users can be really tunnel visioned, especially when it comes to sourcing their supply. It's difficult to say no to your mate when you are going to see your dealer, especially when it's a close mate or someone you live with asking you to pick up for them, it's close to impossible. Getting out of crime is a mammoth task, especially when your hand isn't being forced by the police or a similar authority.

As a society we consider acts of desperation more criminal than we do acts of greed. I think of a business owner I knew well they kept 2 balance sheets and 2 profit and loss statements for their business. One was utalised to track revenue and expenses, whilst the second was purely for the tax man. Come tax time there would be a $400k discrepancy between the true revenue and expenses documents and the second version that were keeping for the tax man, That $400k went straight into their pocket. saving them $200k in tax, so they were $600k in front every year.

You can imagine that the first year they decided to take the financial risk of tracking things differently for tax, they were apprehensive and concerned. Once they realised how easy it was to get away with it, the apprehension quickly dissipated. When the concern was gone, they stepped things up, deciding to also pocket the revenue from international clients. They realised it was super easy for them to hide fraud from the tax man and they popped their feet on their desk whilst they counted all of the excess money they had from their corporate faux pas.

My point is this, had they not already started defrauding the Australian Government with two balance sheets and two profit and loss statements, they would have found it difficult to step things up and derive a financial advantage from the second move to hide the revenue gained from international clients. Just like the drug dealer, the corporate criminal gets trapped in a vicious cycle of crime, until it just becomes something that they do.

For some strange reason, society judges the guy with addiction issues trying to make ends meet more harshly than the millionaire with two balance sheets and two profit and loss statements, despite the fact that the guy with addiction issues is so much more likely to be acting out of desperation. Whatever the case, in each scenario neither set out to commit a crime. Whilst each are responsible for their decisions, I'm unsure how labelling them criminals with a criminal record offers any advantage to society.

Although their motivations are different, neither motivation is to cause harm or damage to another person. Both are making decisions based on the advice, information and opportunity available to them. I imagine both lose sleep at night when they reflect on their decisions and ponder the eventual moment they will get called out. Luckily for the corporate criminal, there is much less stigma surrounding their activity and it's much harder to catch them out.

Everyone says that jail is terrifying until you go there. The idea of going back isn't half as scary. Nobody wants to go back, but I'm told, once you experience what jail is like, you realise that it's something that you can handle. Your criminal record makes it impossible for you to get a job, so you are forced to crack on, accepting things as they are. making money as best you can, with your figures crossed behind your back, hoping for the best. I have never heard anyone express happiness about a return to jail, but I did know this one kid who really struggled making ends meet and he was grateful for a few months where he didn't have to worry about where his next meal would come from. For most, it's an eventuality because their criminal record blocks them out of the majority of opportunities. Let's be real, who would you give the position to? The guy with experience that has been to jail or the other guy without a record.

In some cases, the criminal record question is one of the first things a job applicant is asked, in others it's the final check before you are officially offered a position. A record means no job. Unless you are lucky and find a small business that isn't equipped to run all of the screening available to employers, you have zero percent chance to find work. Instead, you are destined to get back into crime, having made a bunch of new mates in jail who would have educated you on a plethora of different methods of making money outside of formal employment. Australian society makes it close to impossible for people who have committed a crime, to start over and pave a reputable future for themselves. At the very best, they odds are stacked against them and they are set up to fail.

Then, our welfare system doesn't have the resources to adequately fund jobseekers, forcing them to live below the poverty line. Everyone on Centerlink has a side hustle, either a cash in hand job that helps them get a leg up, or a Sunday market stall. Welfare in Australia doesn't cut the mustard.

People go to jail to pay for their crime, or they pay for it by fulfilling agreements made with police or the courts. What benefit does society gain from branding people with a scarlet letter once they fulfil the obligations asked of them by police or the courts? How does it benefit a potential employer knowing that someone had addiction issues and sold drugs for a minute? Wouldn't they be better off to drug test potential employees? If a former drug addict is clean, they should be celebrated for successfully battling addiction. They would actually be the best choice of employee given they have the strength to conquer something that 80% of us can't manage. Instead, the employer bypasses this potential employee because they have a criminal record.

Even our greedy corporate criminal. Imagine if police in Australia were actually concerned about corporate crime and bothered to investigate it, our corporate criminal might get busted. Assume our corporate criminal copped a criminal record. It would keep them from being hired from most corporate jobs. Who is the last person that would commit a corporate crime in the future? Probably the guy who was busted for doing it earlier in life and was forced to think about the stupid decisions they made. Branding them a criminal is pointless. There is no benefit to anyone. The criminals lose, as does society.

Why don't we simply ditch criminal records all together? Rather than serving someone with a punishment that they can never escape, how about we give them a real chance at building a future we can all be proud of? Make it easy for them to get a job, make it less likely for them to get back into the crime that they were punished for in the first place. We throw around the term institutionalization, but eradicating the criminal record will remove the barrier from securing proper employment and reroute the endless cycle of reoffending.

Glenn Hall is a former advertising executive turned freelance communications consultant. Glenn has a fresh perspective on topical issues and a unique way of viewing the world.   With diverse interests, no topic is out of reach and Glenn will be sure to challenge your thinking.