Democrats. Why are your leaders doing this?

[Droid12345]

JFC. It is 80 people murdered by violent felonies who otherwise would have been in jail awaiting their trial. You are very cavalier with other people’s live waiting more data. Let’s add nearly 100 incidents of attempted murder. And these are just those that are reported and arrests made.

How do you know they would've been in jail? Are you aware of whether the offenders could've afforded bail? If they could've, they would still have been released. If you're not for released people while awaiting trial, then you should be advocating for eliminating bail altogether. Why are you not?

As for your sources. A joke. The Brennan Center? And yeah. Retail theft has gone down in a lot of these places because the Soros DA no longer pursues retail theft under 1k. So the robbery still occurs but it’s not charged and therefore not entered in the crime stats. If you are going to be smart the first thing is to understand when your sources are lying to you.

So find a source that supports your argument that bail reform results in more crime. Limit it to violent crime if you want, to account for your claim that overall crime rates are artificially lowered by changes in prosecution practices. Simply pointing out that sometimes people who are out on bail commit crimes doesn't do it, because that also happened before bail reform.

And oh. Car jacking in Chicago? The 14 year old holds the gun so if it’s the 1 in 20 that results in an arrest it’s a “diversion program.” Guess how many get picked up again?

This is an argument against "diversion programs," not bail reform. If you want to treat minors the same as adults, then advocate for that.



For those of you that are all up in arms about people on bail committing crimes, either come out and say we shouldn't have bail at all or simply admit that you think poor people don't deserve bail the same way non-poor people do.

I've had my fill of this topic of discussion, have a good day.

 

[Droid12345]

More data is needed than 2 years of statistics. I really can’t believe he posted that.

Except to say this: he didn't provide statistics. He provided one data point with nothing offered for comparison. I only said 2 years because that's how long it's been since the policy changes he referenced. Even if it was 2 years of data, though, it would need to be considered in context of the overall rise in crime nationwide, including in places that DIDN'T have bail reform.

I can't believe you posted that, apparently, you think one data point is enough to draw conclusions.

 

[Joetboiler]

I didn't say anything about nurturing criminals. What does this have to do with anything?

Do we know if these people could've paid the bail? If they could pay the bail, they would still have been released to commit more crimes.

"There is no data showing that New York’s bail reform has fueled the crime"

You don’t understand it. The reform prohibits the judge from detaining the felon. They get charged and walk. If some guy sexually assaulted your daughter you want to know that they got booked and charged and then released w/in 24 hours because your jurisdiction does not consider that life alerting event to be “violent.” Dude you picked a position because you must uphold the words on your lawn sign and keep getting deeper and deeper.

 

[Joetboiler]

How do you know they would've been in jail? Are you aware of whether the offenders could've afforded bail? If they could've, they would still have been released. If you're not for released people while awaiting trial, then you should be advocating for eliminating bail altogether. Why are you not?

So find a source that supports your argument that bail reform results in more crime. Limit it to violent crime if you want, to account for your claim that overall crime rates are artificially lowered by changes in prosecution practices. Simply pointing out that sometimes people who are out on bail commit crimes doesn't do it, because that also happened before bail reform.

This is an argument against "diversion programs," not bail reform. If you want to treat minors the same as adults, then advocate for that.



For those of you that are all up in arms about people on bail committing crimes, either come out and say we shouldn't have bail at all or simply admit that you think poor people don't deserve bail the same way non-poor people do.

I've had my fill of this topic of discussion, have a good day.

So you just proved you have no idea what bail reform is. Your sources like to make you think it’s some guy with a job who accidentally walked out with a pack of gum. These are violent repeat offenders allowed to walk on $500 deposits and sometimes nothing. In Chicago 36 people have killed somebody who previously would be in Cook County CC. That’s real life victims.

Again. Why do your sources not tell you that the Soros DAs no longer prosecutes a number of former felonies? So obviously there is a decrease of those crimes.

In my last month in Chicago I watched twice people walk out of Walgreens with a couple hundred in merchandise. Just walk. Right past the clerks. Nobody called the cops. Why? 5 years ago that’s a crime. Today. No. So has crime reduced? Or just been reclassified away?

 

[TheGunner]

I didn't say anything about nurturing criminals. What does this have to do with anything?

Do we know if these people could've paid the bail? If they could pay the bail, they would still have been released to commit more crimes.

"There is no data showing that New York’s bail reform has fueled the crime"

Other than the fact that NY implements bail reform and crime increases. The only reason people are debating is because they believe there are mitigating factors.

And what’s NY’s response? Oh, they pared back bail reform…why did they do that?????????

 

[TheGunner]

Do we know if these people could've paid the bail? If they could pay the bail, they would still have been released to commit more crimes.
crime"

I guess you could ask if they could have paid the bail for each one of the crimes. So each of the 10 criminals committing an average of 50
Crimes…. If bail was set at $50k * 50 = $2.5MM.

Yeah, I’m sure that each of these criminals has that lying around…that’s why they are criminals.

And if you want to argue that point, than make the bail $1MM for each offense…that’s something I would agree with.

As the old adage goes…..
If you can’t do the time, then don’t do the crime

Which of course is old school, todays version is, if you can’t do the time….just move to a state where they don’t “give you time”

 

[Joetboiler]

I don’t think people understand how bad it is in places. This guy handed the gun to Toledo because he was a minor. He knows the rules. He actually get a decent bail and some wokesters come in and bail him out. Probably something about it on their lawn sign. So everyone has to do extra work to keep this guy behind bars so he doesn’t do more damage. Why would anybody think this is a guy to return to the community?

https://cwbchicago.com/2022/09/man-...-ammo-in-his-electronic-monitoring-house.html

 

[MilwaukeeBoilerFan]

As far as I know this is the first state pursuing this. Where was this done where it resulted in horrendous outcomes?

If you commit a crime and have money, you go home and wait for trial. If you commit a crime and are too poor to afford bail, you sit in a detention center and wait for trial. The act does not allow a pre-trial release without a judge reviewing each case.

It costs the state $ to house all the people in detention centers. Also the low income people who can't afford bail most likely likely will lose whatever low paying job they have, if they have one, due to being detained. Regardless of whether or not they are convicted.

I don't see what's wrong with this.

Look at the Memphis Murder case. Rapist killed latest victim while DNA sat waiting to be tested. A poor DNA system let the known convict continue walking the streets. Caught and released early in 2020 to do worse just a week or two ago. I’m sure the woman’s family would want a more safe system.
Speaking for majority of society, I think they would want safer streets as well.

 

[SKYDOG]

Except to say this: he didn't provide statistics. He provided one data point with nothing offered for comparison. I only said 2 years because that's how long it's been since the policy changes he referenced. Even if it was 2 years of data, though, it would need to be considered in context of the overall rise in crime nationwide, including in places that DIDN'T have bail reform.

I can't believe you posted that, apparently, you think one data point is enough to draw conclusions.

Common sense tells me it is.

 

[ecouch]

 

[TheGunner]

Look at the Memphis Murder case. Rapist killed latest victim while DNA sat waiting to be tested. A poor DNA system let the known convict continue walking the streets. Caught and released early in 2020 to do worse just a week or two ago. I’m sure the woman’s family would want a more safe system.
Speaking for majority of society, I think they would want safer streets as well.

Democrats will be able to reform this individual. But requiring bail isn’t fair….don’t you get it (TIC)

🤷‍♂️ 🤦‍♂️

Democrats… “Charmin tough” on crime.

 

[TheGunner]

View embedded media

Im waiting for the “that’s racist” comment…when I reality, that’s equality. When your store gets looted, no one can purchase without a store clerk.

Every business should just leave town, that’s the answer to Democrats “don’t prosecute” agenda.

Or just stop paying taxes for the lack of “law enforcement” like Louis Vuitton did in Oregon.

Louis Vuitton store in Portland stiffs city, Multnomah County on local tax bill, lawsuit claims

One of the world’s largest luxury brands — and a target of widespread looting during a downtown Portland riot — is shortchanging the city and Multnomah County on taxes, court records allege.

www.oregonlive.com

I bet prosecutors prosecute this case.

 

[SKYDOG]

Im waiting for the “that’s racist” comment…when I reality, that’s equality. When your store gets looted, no one can purchase without a store clerk.

Every business should just leave town, that’s the answer to Democrats “don’t prosecute” agenda.

Or just stop paying taxes for the lack of “law enforcement” like Louis Vuitton did in Oregon.

Louis Vuitton store in Portland stiffs city, Multnomah County on local tax bill, lawsuit claims

One of the world’s largest luxury brands — and a target of widespread looting during a downtown Portland riot — is shortchanging the city and Multnomah County on taxes, court records allege.

www.oregonlive.com

I bet prosecutors prosecute this case.

Portland expects taxes to be paid, but the retailer can’t get service from law enforcement. That seems about right.

 

[TeddyValentineDidNothingWrong]

Other than the fact that NY implements bail reform and crime increases. The only reason people are debating is because they believe there are mitigating factors.

And what’s NY’s response? Oh, they pared back bail reform…why did they do that?????????

Because of pressure from uninformed people like you.

 

[Crayfish57]

How do you know they would've been in jail? Are you aware of whether the offenders could've afforded bail? If they could've, they would still have been released. If you're not for released people while awaiting trial, then you should be advocating for eliminating bail altogether. Why are you not?

So find a source that supports your argument that bail reform results in more crime. Limit it to violent crime if you want, to account for your claim that overall crime rates are artificially lowered by changes in prosecution practices. Simply pointing out that sometimes people who are out on bail commit crimes doesn't do it, because that also happened before bail reform.

This is an argument against "diversion programs," not bail reform. If you want to treat minors the same as adults, then advocate for that.



For those of you that are all up in arms about people on bail committing crimes, either come out and say we shouldn't have bail at all or simply admit that you think poor people don't deserve bail the same way non-poor people do.

I've had my fill of this topic of discussion, have a good day.

No one denies poor people the same bail as non poor people. You are just an idiot. The affordability of bail has nothing to do with the court system. Lets be honest who commits more crime?

 

[Joetboiler]

Because of pressure from uninformed people like you.

Here is the list of crimes that judges could no longer require bail or detain until trial. By law they were prohibited.

I’ll assume you are informed of these.https://www.cbsnews.com/newyork/news/all-crimes-new-york-bail-reform/

And since you are and think any changes were due to pressure from dopes like me you have taken the position that you are cool with somebody assaulting you child? Maybe it’s your day care provider. Or how about somebody drugging your daughter at a bar? Somebody burns down your garage? All these crimes were book and release.

And you and others think that having all these people back on the street - knowing there are little or no consequences - has zero effect on crime?

 

[TheGunner]

Because of pressure from uninformed people like you.

Why did they implement bail reform? Because of uninformed people like TeddyValentineDidNothingWrong

 

[pcboiler]

You don’t understand it. The reform prohibits the judge from detaining the felon. They get charged and walk. If some guy sexually assaulted your daughter you want to know that they got booked and charged and then released w/in 24 hours because your jurisdiction does not consider that life alerting event to be “violent.” Dude you picked a position because you must uphold the words on your lawn sign and keep getting deeper and deeper.

With the Illinois reform every case will be decided by a judge. They will not just get charged and walk.

 

[Joetboiler]

With the Illinois reform every case will be decided by a judge. They will not just get charged and walk.

https://www.fox32chicago.com/news/illinois-safe-t-act-which-will-end-cash-bail-explained

"Judges will have discretion in certain cases, like armed robbery is a case that is detainable. But for those other offenses you mentioned, second-degree murder, kidnapping, hate crimes, aggravated batteries, robberies – just to name a few – judges will not have discretion unless the person is a willful risk of imminent flight. Their risk to the public and their risk to commit a future crime will not be a criteria," said DuPage County State's Attorney Robert Berlin.

I have heard several State's Attorney speak on this. Both Republican and Democrat. All but 2 in the State (of 100 IIRC) oppose. Guess the 2. Their statement is that it will make it extremely difficult to pre-trial detain an individual. One SA said he has been notified that he must provide justification for the several hundred violent felons being detained for trial (murderers, rapist, car jackers) by 1/1/23 or by Statute they'll be freed and given an ankle bracelet. Maybe he lied.

This is basically the Tim Evans Cook County Circuit Court Bail Reform statewide - which has resulted in 80 people murdered by individuals released on no cash bail or $500 deposits since inception. Real people dead.
What i find odd is those who are most likely to support these policies are least likely to live in the neighborhoods that the individual is being back to and allowed to continue their havoc.

 

[Crayfish57]

Judges will have discretion in certain cases, like armed robbery is a case that is detainable. But for those other offenses you mentioned, second-degree murder, kidnapping, hate crimes, aggravated batteries, robberies – just to name a few – judges will not have discretion unless the person is a willful risk of imminent flight. Their risk to the public and their risk to commit a future crime will not be a criteria," said DuPage County State's Attorney Robert Berlin.

Isn't that special? To me the nature of all the crimes listed would mean they are are a risk of imminent flight if releaased with no bail especially the ones that know they are actually guilty. Granted the intelligence of the people that are actually guilty but I know if I were and they set me loose free of any bond I'd likely get to court a day early ? Who wouldnt right? So how much money will the state spend trying to track these people down? This one good thin about the ones with neck and face tats at least they will be easier to identify on Wal Mart security cams.

 

[pcboiler]

https://www.fox32chicago.com/news/illinois-safe-t-act-which-will-end-cash-bail-explained

"Judges will have discretion in certain cases, like armed robbery is a case that is detainable. But for those other offenses you mentioned, second-degree murder, kidnapping, hate crimes, aggravated batteries, robberies – just to name a few – judges will not have discretion unless the person is a willful risk of imminent flight. Their risk to the public and their risk to commit a future crime will not be a criteria," said DuPage County State's Attorney Robert Berlin.

I have heard several State's Attorney speak on this. Both Republican and Democrat. All but 2 in the State (of 100 IIRC) oppose. Guess the 2. Their statement is that it will make it extremely difficult to pre-trial detain an individual. One SA said he has been notified that he must provide justification for the several hundred violent felons being detained for trial (murderers, rapist, car jackers) by 1/1/23 or by Statute they'll be freed and given an ankle bracelet. Maybe he lied.

This is basically the Tim Evans Cook County Circuit Court Bail Reform statewide - which has resulted in 80 people murdered by individuals released on no cash bail or $500 deposits since inception. Real people dead.
What i find odd is those who are most likely to support these policies are least likely to live in the neighborhoods that the individual is being back to and allowed to continue their havoc.

Oof, thanks for the details. Hopefully it'll get fixed in time.

 

[TeddyValentineDidNothingWrong]

Why did they implement bail reform? Because of uninformed people like TeddyValentineDidNothingWrong

Damn, you said the same thing back to me. I've been owned.

 

[bonefish1]

Why are you democrats such pus$ies when it comes to crime?
All your lawn signs and virtual signaling claiming that we live in an unjust and racist society that’s unfair to certain demographics.

Guess what? Life is tough, it’s even tougher if you’re stupid and even tougher still if you’re a stupid criminal.

Can’t afford bail and have to sit in jail until your trial? Too bad! You should have thought about that before you decided to commit a crime.

you bleeding heart Libs are a joke.

 

[Joetboiler]

Oof, thanks for the details. Hopefully it'll get fixed in time.

You are technically correct that judges will be required to "consider" each case which carries a charge allowed for review but the end result will be many people released which should not have been. For example. Guy fires gun at somebody. Cops arrest guy for attempted murder (you think). Kim Foxx says i can't prove he wanted to kill him so i say unlawful discharge of a weapon. That's not on the list for pretrial detention judge so judge can't detain. Guy goes home until trial. Guy goes back and kills the guy he previously shot at.

What I don't know for sure if people being held for pretrial detention walk on 1/1/23. Every SA i've heard says yes, but analysis i've read says no.

You want to read the real-life implications of bail reform. Ask how this happens:

https://cwbchicago.com/2022/09/37-m...onitoring-for-3-felonies-prosecutors-say.html

 

[Joetboiler]

Isn't that special? To me the nature of all the crimes listed would mean they are are a risk of imminent flight if releaased with no bail especially the ones that know they are actually guilty. Granted the intelligence of the people that are actually guilty but I know if I were and they set me loose free of any bond I'd likely get to court a day early ? Who wouldnt right? So how much money will the state spend trying to track these people down? This one good thin about the ones with neck and face tats at least they will be easier to identify on Wal Mart security cams.

As stated in the article i posted one of the crazy shit provisions of the SAFE T act is that that home confinement really isn't home confinement.

"That law allows people on EM to move freely two days a week to run errands, complete tasks, and so forth. The law also decriminalized EM violations of less than 48 hours. As a result, Hunter cannot be charged with escaping EM to allegedly kill Conner because he was not out of his house for more than two days."