The Official Forum

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)
-   Baseball (https://forum.officiating.com/baseball/)
-   -   Background Checks (https://forum.officiating.com/baseball/41506-background-checks.html)

Cub42 Wed Jan 30, 2008 06:45pm

Background Checks
 
http://philadelphia.comcastsportsnet...p.asp?ID=61752

Here we go!

SAump Wed Jan 30, 2008 09:12pm

T S A
 
Is there any benefit to adding on to the list?

1) Dirty nukes, 2) Hazardous waste, 3) Toxic drinking water, 4) Subway chemical leak, 5) Robbing banks w/ explosive jackets, 6) Die Hard One, 7) Die Hard Two, ...

"(Later the idiosyncratic Salvador Dalí explained it as: "There is only one difference between a madman and me. I am not mad.")"

I remember a time when police would actually wait for a crime to occur. The only thing background checks provide is another source of income for those affilliated with law enforcement groups. {Edited to add final thoughts on the matter: If BC were free, the whole idea wouldn't fly. But at $80 a pop, who's the crook?}

Is it really safe for police to plant surrealistic images in such a very public manner?

GarthB Wed Jan 30, 2008 09:48pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by SAump
The only thing background checks provide is another source of income for those affilliated with law enforcement groups.

Utter nonsense.

Correctly managed, background checks can and have proved very useful in the amateur sports arena.

Locally, they have uncovered at least three officials with convictions of deviant sexual behavior, and on the west side of the state a couple of youth coaches with child molesting backgrounds have been exposed.

That said, that isn't what the MLB umpires are opposed to.

DG Wed Jan 30, 2008 10:08pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by SAump
I remember a time when police would actually wait for a crime to occur. The only thing background checks provide is another source of income for those affilliated with law enforcement groups.

Law enforcement officers are also open to background checks before employment and even then some slip through that should never be. And then there are school teachers, social workers, coaches.....

MichaelVA2000 Wed Jan 30, 2008 11:21pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by GarthB
Utter nonsense.

Correctly managed, background checks can and have proved very useful in the amateur sports arena.

Locally, they have uncovered at least three officials with convictions of deviant sexual behavior, and on the west side of the state a couple of youth coaches with child molesting backgrounds have been exposed.

That said, that isn't what the MLB umpires are opposed to.

In Northern Virginia earlier this month a high school Spanish teacher who also coached the girls and boys track and field teams was arrested for attempting to arrange sex with minor over the internet. At a bond hearing today his bail was denied.

Our nations youth need to be protected against these types of predators.

GarthB Wed Jan 30, 2008 11:22pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by DG
Law enforcement officers are also open to background checks before employment and even then some slip through that should never be. And then there are school teachers, social workers, coaches.....

I get fingerprinted and undergo a Washington State Patrol and NCIC background check every two years.

I'm a bit confused about the fingerprinting part. It's as if they're expecting them to change.

In addition to that backgournd check for teaching, I undergo background checks every two years for my officiating activities separately.

Since the years don't align, I end up undergoing a background check annually.

And they still haven't caught me.:D

BretMan Wed Jan 30, 2008 11:41pm

"In Northern Virginia earlier this month a high school Spanish teacher who also coached the girls and boys track and field teams was arrested for attempting to arrange sex with minor over the internet."

The unfortunate thing is that, unless this teacher had ever been caught/arrested for a similar crime, a standard background check would have revealed nothing.

That is, it would have done absolutely nothing to "protect our youth from this type of predator".

GarthB Wed Jan 30, 2008 11:44pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by msavakinas
out of pure curiousity... what do you teach?

This year?

2 classes of Computer Applications and three classes of Marketing Management.


I have 14 endorsements (Washington's term for teaching certificate).

GarthB Wed Jan 30, 2008 11:47pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by BretMan
"In Northern Virginia earlier this month a high school Spanish teacher who also coached the girls and boys track and field teams was arrested for attempting to arrange sex with minor over the internet."

The unfortunate thing is that, unless this teacher had ever been caught/arrested for a similar crime, a standard background check would have revealed nothing.

That is, it would have done absolutely nothing to "protect our youth from this type of predator".


However, for reasons known only to them, many predators with records continue to try to work with youth and do get caught by background checks.

As I posted above, we have had a couple turn up on background checks here in Spokane and a few on the west side of the state.

MadCityRef Wed Jan 30, 2008 11:58pm

Wisconsin teaching credentials (license) require two sets of fingerprints: One to the FBI for a check, the other for the WI state police.

Irony since WIAA (Wisc., not Wash.) has no background check. Soooo, all you predators, come on by!!!


The MLB umpires should tell their neighbors to answer 'yes' to all questions.

GarthB Thu Jan 31, 2008 12:09am

Quote:

Originally Posted by MadCityRef
Wisconsin teaching credentials (license) require two sets of fingerprints: One to the FBI for a check, the other for the WI state police.

Irony since WIAA (Wisc., not Wash.) has no background check. Soooo, all you predators, come on by!!!


The MLB umpires should tell their neighbors to answer 'yes' to all questions.


Our fingerprints are done digitally now, so they take them once and can send them to numerous agencies.

NCIC or National Crime Information Center, one of the check we go through, is the data base the FBI uses.

The MiLB umpires, below Triple A, have yet to agree to these background checks.

greymule Thu Jan 31, 2008 01:04am

Checking for a record of serious sex offenses (or violent felonies) is one thing, but (from the article) what does KKK membership have to do with protecting youth from predators? The great liberal icon Hugo L. Black belonged to the Klan. So did Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia.

Should umpires be asked whether they ever belonged to the Communist Party? Whether they own a gun or hunt? Whether they favor affirmative action? Whether they eat meat or wear fur? Whether they ever used illegal drugs? Should all umpires have to be adjudged politically correct?

GarthB Thu Jan 31, 2008 01:19am

Quote:

Originally Posted by greymule
Checking for a record of serious sex offenses (or violent felonies) is one thing, but (from the article) what does KKK membership have to do with protecting youth from predators? The great liberal icon Hugo L. Black belonged to the Klan. So did Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia.

Should umpires be asked whether they ever belonged to the Communist Party? Whether they own a gun or hunt? Whether they favor affirmative action? Whether they eat meat or wear fur? Whether they ever used illegal drugs? Should all umpires have to be adjudged politically correct?

?

kylejt Thu Jan 31, 2008 01:55am

They're looking for people who can be targeted for blackmail.

If a "bad guy" finds something out about you that you didn't want to be made public, you might do something that you normally wouldn't to keep it a secret.

mbyron Thu Jan 31, 2008 08:47am

Quote:

Originally Posted by greymule
Should umpires be asked whether they ever belonged to the Communist Party? Whether they own a gun or hunt? Whether they favor affirmative action? Whether they eat meat or wear fur? Whether they ever used illegal drugs? Should all umpires have to be adjudged politically correct?

I think you're confusing a criminal background check with a detailed investigation of a person's past. The former is under discussion here, and it involves checking a person's fingerprints and other ID info against a national database of convicted felons, especially sex offenders. No investigation of party affiliations or organization membership is involved -- that would be too time consuming, and there's no law enforcement database of that info.

johnnyg08 Thu Jan 31, 2008 09:18am

I'm just wondering how deviant a guy can be working in "A" with 35 some players and probably a few hundred fans in the stands. While I don't condone any type of illegal behavior...sounds like a money making scheme to me...it's not necessary.

greymule Thu Jan 31, 2008 11:28am

I think this New York City detective should be placed on the "do not assign" list:

http://edition.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/01....prostitution/

GarthB Thu Jan 31, 2008 03:06pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnnyg08
I'm just wondering how deviant a guy can be working in "A" with 35 some players and probably a few hundred fans in the stands. While I don't condone any type of illegal behavior...sounds like a money making scheme to me...it's not necessary.

And how does a teacher, in front of 30 students and within a short distance of a dozen administrators act in a deviant manner?

Or, how about the basketball coach in Lynwood, Washington, or the softball coach in Spokane, or the soccer coach in Florida...they all ply their trade in front of multiple players, parents and fans.

They find a way, outside of the arena, to have contact with someone with whom they have built a trust due to their position and contact with them. Be it in a parking lot, locker room, coaches home, player's home...or in one case in Spokane, on a public sidewalk...the truly deviant find a way.

Background checks won't completely put an end to a deviant's behavior, but they will help limit his contact with potential victims and alert the public to the potential danger.

MichaelVA2000 Thu Jan 31, 2008 03:44pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by GarthB
Background checks won't completely put an end to a deviant's behavior, but it will help limit his contact with potential victims and alert the public to the potential danger.

Excellent point.

JJ Thu Jan 31, 2008 04:31pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by GarthB
2 classes of Computer Applications...

Can you tell my why my vcr keeps blinking "12:00" ? Wait a minute..that's not a computer thing, is it? ;)

JJ

Rags 11 Thu Jan 31, 2008 04:34pm

Garth B & mbyron have hit the nail on the head.

Based on being invloved in law enforcement for the last eighteen years, and officiating for the last seven (though this is my first post!:D ), background checks are a "necessary evil" and first defense for many professions and avocations.

I'd rather be discussing the merits of patent leather!

AR

Dakota Thu Jan 31, 2008 04:43pm

If I read the news reports correctly, what is being done with the MLB umpires is not (just) a criminal background check. It involves interviewing neighbors, asking about affiliations (e.g. KKK), etc. In other words, it is a rumor-mongering check. JMO.

GarthB Thu Jan 31, 2008 05:17pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dakota
If I read the news reports correctly, what is being done with the MLB umpires is not (just) a criminal background check. It involves interviewing neighbors, asking about affiliations (e.g. KKK), etc. In other words, it is a rumor-mongering check. JMO.

While I agree that some of the questions apparently being asked are, themselves, questionable, remember that the background check of MLB umpires isn't designed just to turn up a criminal past but also any sign of vulnerability to bribes or blackmail. That, like a security clearance, requires a look into possible affiliations with a variety of groups, causes and people.

Rich Thu Jan 31, 2008 07:15pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by GarthB
While I agree that some of the questions apparently being asked are, themselves, questionable, remember that the background check of MLB umpires isn't designed just to turn up a criminal past but also any sign of vulnerability to bribes or blackmail. That, like a security clearance, requires a look into possible affiliations with a variety of groups, causes and people.

What if the umpire was a "not out" homosexual?

I have a friend who was back when he finished grad school and applied for a security clearance to do some government work. Someone called me and asked me about the guy's sexual activity. Would that be appropriate in the umpires' background check?

greymule Thu Jan 31, 2008 08:10pm

Get a load of this. Now Jesse Jackson's in the act.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,327348,00.html

Publius Thu Jan 31, 2008 08:24pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by greymule
Get a load of this. Now Jesse Jackson's in the act.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,327348,00.html

If the story is accurate, that's the most sensical thing I've ever heard come out of Rev. Jackson's mouth.

GarthB Thu Jan 31, 2008 09:07pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by RichMSN
What if the umpire was a "not out" homosexual?

I have a friend who was back when he finished grad school and applied for a security clearance to do some government work. Someone called me and asked me about the guy's sexual activity. Would that be appropriate in the umpires' background check?

I'm sure that exact question is one of the reasons WUA wants to negotiate the background check questions.

Reportedly, MLB feels they need to question any area that could indicate an umpire is vulnerable to bribes or blackmail. An out-of-the-closet gay man would not, by the fact he is gay, be so subjected. However, could a closeted gay man be vulnerable to such activities. I don't know. I supposes it could depend on the reaspons he remains closeted and how emotionally and financially attached he is to remaining closeted.

My very best friend with whom my wife and I shared a house during grad school is an out-of-the-closet gay man. With that experience and having been a music major, taking several drama courses, making part of my living acting for three years, and working in the ad biz in San Francisco...I am not unfamiliar with both sides of that issue. (I know, I know, I'm guilty of stereotyping. Sorry.)

Despite what I tell my students, I don't have all the answers.:D I'm not sure where I would land on this one at the present time.

greymule Thu Jan 31, 2008 09:56pm

For a long time, homosexuality automatically disqualified men from certain sensitive positions, blackmail being the primary concern. (Remember also that until fairly recently, homosexuality was considered a mental aberration or even an illness, so it was felt that applicants might be unreliable, whether or not the job had a sensitive nature. The American Psychological Association has since changed its position on homosexuality, but privately many psychiatrists and psychologists still hold the older position.) A man known to be homosexual would not be hired by the FBI, the CIA, the State Department, and so on. During World War II, a man could avoid service by what was called "declaring himself," though in doing so he took great risk. This certainly does not mean that homosexuals did not work in sensitive jobs or fight in WW II.

It is suspected that when Joseph N. Welch said to Senator Joseph McCarthy, "I should say, Mr. Senator, that a pixie is a close relative of a fairy. Shall I proceed, sir? Have I enlightened you?" he was trying to needle McCarthy about rumors that McCarthy was homosexual. After all, McCarthy had sent Roy Cohn and G. David Shine to "investigate" subversives working in Europe, but most of their "work" consisted of partying together. In the 1950s, exposure of McCarthy as homosexual would have forced him out of the public eye.

Officially, homosexuals are now protected from discrimination in hiring.

Officially.

Matt Fri Feb 01, 2008 01:01am

Quote:

Originally Posted by greymule
Officially, homosexuals are now protected from discrimination in hiring.

Officially.

Only in some states, and not federally.

johnnyg08 Fri Feb 01, 2008 10:06am

Then it never happens...if they're protected...whatever.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:15am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1