<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Chocolate Cubed &#187; criminal background</title>
	<atom:link href="http://chocolatecubed.com/tag/criminal-background/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://chocolatecubed.com</link>
	<description>Pastry recipes and baking tips from a group of trained pastry professionals.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 13 Jan 2009 06:25:04 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Is Your Criminal Background Private? Should it be?</title>
		<link>http://chocolatecubed.com/2008/original/is-your-criminal-background-private-should-it-be/</link>
		<comments>http://chocolatecubed.com/2008/original/is-your-criminal-background-private-should-it-be/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 03 Aug 2008 21:56:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jordan Salvit</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Original]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[criminal background]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nytimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[privacy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://chocolatecubed.com/?p=36</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This morning, while reading the NY Times, I came across two articles that are somewhat related and started me thinking.  The first is titled &#8220;If You Run a Red Light, Will Everyone Know?&#8221; by Brad Stone.  In this essay Stone informs his readers about a site that was just unveiled last month: CriminalSearches.com. The site is owned [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This morning, while reading the NY Times, I came across two articles that are somewhat related and started me thinking.  The first is titled &#8220;<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/03/technology/03essay.html?ex=1375502400&amp;en=c088f5e09b684874&amp;ei=5124&amp;partner=permalink&amp;exprod=permalink">If You Run a Red Light, Will Everyone Know?</a>&#8221; by Brad Stone.  In this essay Stone informs his readers about a site that was just unveiled last month: <a href="http://CriminalSearches.com">CriminalSearches.com.</a> The site is owned by PeopleFinders and allows anyone to search public criminal records about anyone else.  All you need to know about the person is their first and last name.  This means you can look me up by just entering Jordan Salvit in the search and can see that I have no criminal offenses to my name.  As Stone points out in his blog post, &#8220;<a href="http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/08/02/is-choicepoint-a-model-of-restraint-in-releasing-criminal-records/">Is ChoicePoint a Model of Restraint in Releasing Criminal Records?</a>&#8220;, people can easily judge their peers with access to this potentially incomplete information.  In his essay, Stone notes that if you have the records corrected they will be fixed immediately on the site.  So if you had a traffic violation removed from your record in Virginia it will no longer appear on <a href="http://criminalsearches.com">CriminalSearches.com</a>.  The problem is that nothing ever gets deleted from the internet.  Once content is posted on a site and then crawled by Google and cached in their system or by <a href="http://www.archive.org/">Archive.org</a> someone can always find it.  After finishing the essay the privacy advocate in me was screaming to shut this site down.  <span id="more-36"></span></p>
<p>Then I moved on to the opinion section where Olivia Judson has a piece titled &#8220;<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/03/opinion/03Judson.html?ex=1375416000&amp;en=765e2240531de3b6&amp;ei=5124&amp;partner=permalink&amp;exprod=permalink">Feel The Eyes Upon You</a>&#8220;.  She refers to a some scientific studies that have been done trying to understand how people react when they feel they are being watched.  In situations where people feel they are being watched, even subconsciously, it has been shown that the subjects change their behaviors.  Judson points to the eyes that are watching and ends her piece questioning if we should place more pictures of eyes around and see how they effect crime rates.  </p>
<p>I finished Judson&#8217;s piece and was torn.  Lets say we don&#8217;t take the eyes from the studies so literally.  What if everyone knew that all criminal offenses are published in an online database like CriminalSearches.com?  Would that make our society better as a whole because everyone would be worried that someone can &#8220;see&#8221; what they have done?  Although one part of me thinks we should test out putting eyes everywhere and that an online database is the right start, a larger part says no.  I believe that people can change and publishing their crimes in indelible ink on the web will cripple them for the rest of their lives.  </p>
<p>Although swayed slightly by Judson&#8217;s piece, the privacy advocate and humanist in me won out.  We need to figure out how to stop sites like CriminalSearches.com from distributing private information to the public for free and so easily.</p>
<p><a class="a2a_dd addtoany_share_save" href="http://www.addtoany.com/share_save">Share/Save</a> </p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://chocolatecubed.com/2008/original/is-your-criminal-background-private-should-it-be/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

