Firing of Mall Santa with Past Sex Conviction causes Controversy

Recently abuzz on the news is the recent firing of a 33-year old local mall Santa in Sheboygan Wisconsin Tuesday, just three days before Christmas day. Hal Specht, was hired by an agency that coordinates Santa appearance on numerous malls in Wisconsin. During Specht's employment, his supervisors ran several background checks despite him already passing his agencies background checks.

The agency that employed the mall Santa, IPI Event Photography, assured the public that they run criminal background checks on all their employees, and that there was nothing found when they ran a check on Hal Specht, but it was later found that Hal Specht had legally changed his name from Hal Barts in October 2008. Apparently, Specht lied on his application and claimed he had no criminal convictions which were confirmed during his background check with IPI.

There were some concerns among the public regarding the validity of Specht's termination. Although it is understandable that he is at fault for lying on his application, the core of the issue is the crime he committed and whether or not it justifies his termination.

On the background check run on Hal Barts, his report showed that Barts, who was then 23 years old, was convicted of having sex with a 16-year old runaway who was found hiding in his residence in 1999. Records also show a conviction for felony escape, but any checks that are run under Hal Specht show no convictions.

Multiple comments and emails sent to news rooms, and news sites have expressed concerns regarding the law that allows children who initiate sexual relations with other children from being convicted as sexual offenders. On most cases it is the parent of the female that files the case against their child's partner even if the intercourse was consensual. Similar to Hal Bart's case, where further investigations show, ran away with his 16 year old girlfriend when he was 23 years old and was convicted for sexual misdemeanor when both he and his partner were caught.

Employment Credit Background Checks keep Jobless Unemployed

In the past, having a credit background check for a job at the local Wal-mart was never a part of the employment process, but now with background checking services becoming cheaper and easier to do, more and more employers are using credit checks to judge a potential employees character.

Numerous people have already lost job opportunities due to problems seen by their prospective employers when their credit background check reports arrive. But for majority of the time there really isn't a relationship between job performance and credit problems.

Employment and recruitment experts have sighted that unemployment rates throughout the country continue to stay at double digits and is still climbing. More than 35 percent of the jobless remain without jobs for more than six months at a time. This in turn would lead to unpaid bills and debt which results in bad credit. It's a vicious cycle that haunts majority of the unemployed citizens throughout the US.

Today more that 45 percent of companies now include credit background checks in their employment screening. These credit checks show a potential employees payment history, outstanding debts and may or may not include the actual credit score depending on the service they are using and the information they require.

Numerous arguments have now been raised, labor advocates have expressed concerns that an applicant's credit standing should not be used as a basis to decide if a person is qualified, some applicants are automatically denied even if they were otherwise qualified. But employment experts argue that credit histories may serve as a good meter to judge how dependable a person is or if it's possible they might be tempted to bite the hand that feeds them.

There are proposed federal legislations that would put a stop to the practice, preventing employers from using an applicant's credit history as a factor for denying an applicant a job. It is understandable for some fields of work to conduct these credit checks, like high security companies and job descriptions that involve large amount of money or valuables.

Taking Gun Background Checks into Their Own Hands

Some gun safety advocates are worried about the apparent effectiveness of the current FBI Instant Background Check System. They worry that the response time and overall integrity of the program may be affected by the continued tightening of state budget.

Multiple government and privately run investigations has shown that the Brady Act, one of the corner stone of gun control laws, is apparently not that effective anymore. It is not as much as a problem with the law itself but with its implementation.

One major problem is with the continued practice of people purchasing firearms without going through background checks during gun shows which occur almost every week all around the United States.

With the rising problems in crime and guns continually falling into criminal hands, some states are now taking the law into their own hands, metaphorically and literally speaking. Colorado, one of 14 states that have launched their own state-run programs to conduct their own background checks, and they have already prevented 26 convicted felons and murderers from purchasing firearms using their state-run InstaCheck program.

In Colorado alone nearly five thousand people this November have been denied from purchasing a firearm, due to past criminal records, assault charges, or pending cases and arrest warrants.

Other states are still having their gun shops and registered dealers using the FBI Instant Criminal Background Check System, but there have been reports of delayed reports on some states. With some background check reports coming back as long as three days, which in some situations would already let the buyer purchase the firearm due to the delay.

The FBI Instant Background Check System still runs majority of the gun control background checks in the United States. It still is very effective at running background checks and preventing criminals from buying firearms, but in recent years it has been neglected and hasn't had much attention from congress or the government.

There are multiple advocates that have been pushing for stricter enforcement on the gun control laws, and perhaps an overhaul of the current laws, one of which is the Federal Brady Gun Control and Background check act of 1994, which hasn't had any improvement since its enactment.