Should A Person Be Denied A Pension For A Conviction?
 

Louisiana law doesn't allow the pensions of public workers convicted of felony crimes, such as bribery or stealing, to be taken away or reduced — something state Sen. Arthur J. Lentini, R-Metairie, unsuccessfully tried to change during the last regular legislative session.

My belief is that if you as a public official are convicted of a felony then that person should be sentenced as any normal person for their crime. I believe to take away the pension perhaps which would continue to feed the family is not the right answer. They should be fined and that fine can come from the pension. Also, if you have been convicted of a felony you should never ever be allowed to run for office again. Joe Shine, perfect example, his crime should never have been pardoned and he should never have been allowed to run. Funniest thing..people re-elected him. How stupid is that. Even though oftentimes they don't, the ones in public office should be held to a higher regard for the laws of society and should set the example.

With regard to elected officials, I agree. Convicted felons shouldn't be allowed to run for office. I hear felons aren't allowed to vote, so why should they be allowed to run for office. However, I think taking their pension over a felony charge is double-jeopardy. If you are convicted of a crime, the judge decides your punishment. If you serve that punishment, you should be square with the house. Let them keep their pensions.

Convicted felons aren't allowed to run for public office in Louisiana:

http://senate.legis.state.la.us/Docu...ctive%20Office

Well joe once again you have said it all with your post. Let them keep their pension and pay their fines.

This issue doesn't only refer to elected officials. It refer to public workers. This article was in reference to a fire chief who was busted for a murder-for-hire scheme. He wasn't elected, but does he still get his pension? I think he should.

Duh people who are convicted of felonies are not allowed to run for office but if you recall Joe Shine got himself convicted of a felony and then pardoned of that felony by the governor and then ran for office and was re-elected. To me, that is just wrong.

I believe the portion they paid into retirement in entitled, however, the taxpayer portion should be forfeited. As the negative impact on the economy and their family,,, tough s***, that is what the job market and welfare is providing... opportunity and riding coat tails. As a private citizen that is what I would be told.


As a side analogy, why should the doctors that defrauded insurance companies and the government lose their license to practice, repay monies involved, and pay fines...

Sounds like public officials elected or not are above the law!

If you are pardoned then you are not technically "a convicted felon."

Hmm I do like the idea of the taxpayer portion being taken. Great idea. Now about the doctors. What are you saying? That you think their license should be taken or should not? Do you think that doctors are watched closely enough for this?

Joe I get that but you are missing the point or something. Should a public official be able to be pardoned of a felony where he was convicted of a crime such as bribery? To me he should not. Basically you slapped him on the hand and are freeing him to go out and do it again.

>Should a public official be able to be pardoned of a felony where he was convicted of a crime such as bribery?

Depends on the specific case. We have pardons for a reason.

There are certain groups that prefer there elected officials to have a rap sheet :eek:

I am saying that a doctors conviction carries a life sentence if a licence is revoked. If it that serious for one group, it should be that serious for all.

I believe it to be descrimination,,,, Ask Imus!

Until pardoned first.. Then it's ok...

(Edited - Sorry, I should read from the bottom up. you folks are going too fast. It's hard to keep up nowadays)