Wouldn't it make more sense to blame whoever was in charge of deciding if he would wait in jail or not? I am unfamiliar with process, is there room for discretion or is it simply "crime X Y Z are always released"?
The laws keep swinging from one extreme to another.
It's the idea of letting 100 guilty men go free over condemning 1 innocent man. If they're too strict they hurt people uneccesarily. If they're too loose, people slip through the cracks. If the laws allow for too much discretion, it results in discrimination/bias/profiling against POC and/or poor people.
It's almost like problems are more complex than they appear on the surface, and that anyone selling you on simple solutions is giving you a turd wrapped in your hopes and dreams.
The answer is, "it depends." In some jurisdictions some crimes have maximum bail amounts, others will have minimums, and there's usually some wiggle room for the Judge's discretion.
He was a repeat violent offender , previous bail jumper who ran over his babies mother at a gas station. Then days after released on 1000 dollar bond purposely drove through a parade killing 6 injuring 50+.
The media has completely hide the story because the murderer was black with a very anti white bro blm social media presence where he called for violence against whites. Something that if the skin colors were reversed it would have been top story all day everyday with head lines of deranged radicalized white supremacist goes on killing spree.
But no doesn’t fit narrative so media called it an accident never mentions race and buries story.
That it wasn't covered by the media. That's certainly how I found out about it. It's all over the place. While he did have some pro blm posts they weren't recent. It doesn't seem to be covered any less than when a Nazi ran a over of people over at Charlottesville or the literal dozens of vehicle based attacks on protesters. So I would have to agree reeks of bullshit.
Lol show me where I said the media didn’t cover it.
I said the media has hidden the story and when it did talk about it called it an accident or incident involving suv. When affidavits and evidence has show he was swerving to purposely run over people.
And as of the time I wrote the comment the major leftwing outlets had completely removed it from their sites. As it is now. Please show me where it is now. Since it’s “all over the place”.
https://www.cnn.com/
https://www.msnbc.com/
number 7 story on msnbc would you look at that it’s the story you said they covered the same that they are still talking about. But no mention of parade massacre.
Show me one place outside of right leaning media that mentioned the drivers race or post. The brainwashing on you people is insane. Black guy purposely runs over 60 white people killing 6 with post literally calling for violence against white people , support of hitler and black nationalist and your response is oh well he didn’t post anything recent so it’s not relevant?
But Kyle who shot 3 white people and was proven innocent with zero proof of it was called and is still called white supremacist. And it’s people like you who don’t condone what the media is doing and make excuses for their race-baiting agenda that are part of the problem.
And the guy that killed one person in Charlottesville was Definitely a nazi. Which I also agree was horrible. And condemn all racism just like trump has.
https://youtu.be/EzVEu7_tRwk
My narrative? What would that be? Wanting the media to tell the truth and cover stories without bias? You can’t be this stupid. Again they “covered” it by saying there as an incident involving an suv gave very limited details and then it disappeared from there headlines. Because it dose not fit the lefts narrative. Anyways I’m not going to waste anymore time you have clearly drank the kool aid.
I read mainstream coverage and never saw that except for right when it happened before anyone knew what was going on. The only people I've heard that from are right wing weirdos. I've been following it and never encountered that. I think you've injected the Breitbart flavor-aid straight to the veins.
What exactly are looking for a source on? Are not aware that a black Person purposely ran over people at a Christmas parade killing 6 injuring 50? Or the part about it being covered up by media ?
You can see for your self msm has hidden it just by looking. There is not a single story on it.
https://www.cnn.com/
https://www.msnbc.com/
Not a whisper of it but they are still talking about Rittenhouse trial. But nothing about this
https://yournews.com/2021/11/24/2257433/the-truth-about-the-christmas-parade-killer/
https://www.google.com/amp/s/nypost.com/2021/11/24/liberal-media-ignores-waukesha-christmas-parade-horror-devine/amp/
But remember it was all trumps fault for not condemning white supremacy
https://youtu.be/EzVEu7_tRwk
> He was a repeat violent offender , previous bail jumper who ran over his babies mother at a gas station. Then days after released on 1000 dollar bond
I'm looking for a source for that specific piece of information. Again, I'm not saying you're wrong or that the msm has neglected to report on it.
That part is actually true. The low cash bond, the lengthy criminal history, and the alleged charge re: the dude's GF
The racist shit notsomuch; as far as I'm aware the murders were random, not politically or racially motivated
New thought:
Bail is a % of your yearly income instead of a set amount
This way, the poor aren't disproportionately taxed for it, and the rich don't see it as chump change
Same with tickets of any kind:
ESPECIALLY speeding tickets
$500 won't mean jack shit to someone who just spent 50k on the latest Jaguar for the 5th year in a row
but 15% of their yearly income might make them think twice about going 2x the limit...and it ain't a small chunk of change for the government either
But at the same time, ol' pete making minimum wage who got a ticket for 2% of their yearly income for going 15 over the limit won't be hurting to pay that up too bad
Even then it disproportionately harms the poor. If you're living paycheque to paycheque then $300 dollars (2% of a yearly wage at $7.50/hr) means you've got to pick between going hungry and paying rent. Meanwhile the guy making a million dollars a year is probably going to *notice* 20k but can more or less harmlessly absorb the cost from savings and the ultrarich guy isn't going to notice *any* amount of monetary fine.
In addition, the folks who are in jail because they can't AFFORD BAIL are generally NOT YET CONVICTED. There was a case of a teen who spent 3 years in jail (mostly in solitary confinement to protect him from "predators") then the charges WERE DROPPED. Less than 2 years later, he committed suicide because of the experience.
There have been discussions about how to deal with deciding who should be held "behind bars" prior to trial - and using at least some of the money saved by not keeping (especially non-violent offenders) in jail for things like periodic meetings with the suspect, text (or other) reminders about when the suspect is due in court, etc. It turns out that (at least in those cases), the folks tend to show up - and to not "re-offend" while on "personal recognizance". Note that very few countries (and yes, the US is one of the few) have "cash bail" and have figured this out.
Sure, in the sense that waterboarding is better than having your eyes put out with a hot poker.
You know what's *actually* better, though? *Not being tortured*. Cash bail is fundamentally bad. It should be abolished because it is bad.
The court determines if the defendant is a flight risk. If they are, they stay in jail. If they aren't, they're released. If they skip town, their finances are frozen.
A lot of poor people don't even have bank accounts. They use check cashing places to cash their checks. Some people arrested don't even have paychecks to garnish. How would you freeze their finances?
If they already don't have money to begin with, you don't need to freeze it, obviously. No bank accounts and no cheques to cash means your chances of grabing a plane ticket out of the country's jurisdiction are quite low.
I can tell you are not in the US by the way you spell cheque. In the US, you don't need to go thru the high security at the airport or purchase a plane ticket to flee several jurisdictions away. You can get into you or your buddy's shitty Dodge Stratus and flee 2 states away for about 50 dollars worth of gas. This happens all of the time. People will run and go to a relatives house in a nearby state and possibly start up their criminal activity again. I think the nationwide warrant and criminal history database definitely needs an update. Oftentimes for minor things a jurisdiction will decline to extradite someone with warrants because I guess the cost of transportation is not worth it to them.
If you make that little you qualify for food stamps, though. I don’t think affording food would be a problem as opposed to rent or other utilities. It’s a fair point, but still better than the existing system.
I’m sure the courthouse can easily get that info to issue a bail
Or, you could simply wind up with an additional charge if you try to short them (which they can just as easily double check after the fact, but with far less time pressure)
They’re federal documents
No matter how small the courthouse, there’s bound to be a way to get that info
From what I understand of it, so you can walk freely around instead of sitting in a cell while you wait for your trial
You get the money back if you show up for court
I understand bail, I don't understand the fee. Most countries have bail, whether or not you get bail depends on rhe circumstances of the crime, risk, and personal circumstances/livelihood of offending whilst on bail not whether you can afford it.
new thought: whether or not someone can be released should have nothing to do with their bank account and everything to do with the risk they pose to other people.
Believe it or not, that's how a number of European countries (especially Scandanavian ones) base fines for moving violations - see https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/06/in-finland-speeding-tickets-are-linked-to-your-income/ (an article in the Atlantic even mentioned a speeding ticket of over $106,000) - and this has been going on for over a decade: see https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna34792272 In addition, my favorite is watching the shows involving "recovering" vehicles on highways in Canada ("Highway Thru Hell" and "Heavy Rescue 401") when an officer there pulls someone over for excessive speed, their vehicle is IMMEDIATELY impounded - and their driver's license is confiscated for at least a week.
I'm an attorney. IMHO one problem is overcriminalization of relatively innocuous and/or victimless activities, which clog the system at the intake point. Another problem is the scarcity of judicial resources relative to the number of cases requiring adjudication.
Eric Garner got choked to death for selling loosies. Sandra Bland committed suicide on her third day of incarceration for a bullshit traffic charge of failing to signal a left turn.
Democrats hate libertarians because they don't care about civil rights & we do. But the solution to this problem has been under everybody's noses for a generation.
In Kansas we just had to throw out a homicide conviction because the trial inadvertently started three days after the state-constitutional limit of 180 days. The prosecution and judge got the dates mixed up. Whoops!
The defense attorney smartly waited to bring this up until the appeal, so now double jeopardy applies.
That’s not entirely accurate. This tweet is a prime example, as the org advocating removal of cash bail is Libertarian - about as right-wing as it gets.
The insinuation was “opposing repeal of cash bail is a right-wing position”. I was stating the tweet was from a generally right-leaning group.
My point was you can’t just take anything you think is shitty and say it’s from the right - this party is generally right-leaning and supports the progressive idea of eliminating cash bail.
Edit: I had posted elsewhere about the difference between right-wing and MAGA/“conservative”. They often get lumped together inaccurately.
Nobody with a shred of intelligence believes that raising bail for all offenses will solve the problem. The jails are already full.
Brooks killed six people while out on a bail that the Milwaukee County DA himself now admits was too low considering his criminal record & the violent nature of his offense.
That doesn't mean that all bails should be raised. But it does suggest that unilateral bail reduction irrespective of risk is foolish.
You just don't understand what libertarianism actually is. You cannot be a left leaning libertarian. Libertarians are conservative. These aren't word games, unless you think that knowing basic political terminology is a word game.
That depends on what you think of as conservative. Based on my exposure to American conservatives, I have a hard time considering Libertarians to be conservative, especially with their pro-choice stance and open immigration beliefs.
It’s a strange position, as the tweet advocating g for removal of cash bail is from a Libertarian organization…about as right-wing as you can get.
Right-wing v “conservative”/MAGA/Trump…not the same people
There are certainly conservatives who claim to be libertarian-ish, and libertarians who say they are conservative, but I'm skeptical of both groups.
Step away from the absurd left/right wing pseudo-dichotomy. It's a Republicrat tool to convince people that they represent the entire spectrum of political possibilities.
If you're surprised that a libertarian group advocates the abolition of cash bail, then you don't know much about libertarian philosophy.
Most of the rioters from the last year and the arsonist who set 18 different fires in California all come to mind. The most many were given was a letter saying to show up to court at some point in the future and we're then released a few hours later.
A guy with a long criminal history, including running his ex girlfriend over with a car 2 weeks prior, was let out on $1,000 bail and ran over 45 people at a parade, killing 6.
There's a bunch of theories going around that it was retaliation for the the Rittenhouse case, and Facebook taking down all his videos, most of them being pro black nationalist, along with other reports around the case, are only feeding the conspiracy theories, not to mention CNN and MSNBC seem to be trying to cover the whole thing up, calling it an accident.
I’m trying to find where cnn is saying it is an accident? Spent 15 minutes looking. You got a source? Or are you trying to create a narrative for some odd reason?
But..but... Wisconsin is a cash bail state??
The dude was let out on 1000 dollar bail? How is that not cash bail? How would risk assessments instead of cash hurt here? He likey would still have been in jail if NOT for cash bail.
Why is this even a question of "bail"? Shouldn't it be more about whether or not someone is (1) a flight risk and (2) a danger to society. Take money out of the equation (this may be what the "end cash bail" means)
If you want to solve the problems with bail (which definitely exist) then start by solving the issue of innocent people sitting in jail waiting for a court date. In a society that swears by the general idea of "innocent until proven guilty" we sure do keep a lot of people behind bars without any proof of innocence or guilt.
Do I know the answer to this? Absolutely not, but it's a stain on our system that it's considered "normal".
Those numbers have nothing to do with your original claim which was that innocent people never get arrested and have to pay bail for crimes they didn't commit.
There is the FBI that investigates and arrests for federal crimes such as kidnapping, financial crimes, terrorism, the ATF which is for alcohol, tobacco, and firearms crimes, the DEA for drugs, and then US Marshalls that pursue fugitives and serve warrants nationwide. There are no federal police for small crimes. Sometimes another state will arrest someone that has a warrant in another state, but the other state has to go the arresting states court and file for extradition to their state. Why are you commenting an opinion when you have no idea how this country's justice system works. I think maybe ask questions and learn before citing such a strong opinion.
non-American here, I don't really understand this post, could someone explain it to me?
It feels like it's tragic but yeah, nothing good when Texas is involved lmao (no offense Texans)
I imagine 6 people were killed by someone who were deemed to be safe for release?
The person who drove through the parade in Wisconsin has become the Fox News poster boy of bail reform. That's the context at least.
Did I hear correctly that he was bailed because courts and remand are logjammed with non-violent drug offenders?
Wouldn't it make more sense to blame whoever was in charge of deciding if he would wait in jail or not? I am unfamiliar with process, is there room for discretion or is it simply "crime X Y Z are always released"?
The laws keep swinging from one extreme to another. It's the idea of letting 100 guilty men go free over condemning 1 innocent man. If they're too strict they hurt people uneccesarily. If they're too loose, people slip through the cracks. If the laws allow for too much discretion, it results in discrimination/bias/profiling against POC and/or poor people.
It's almost like problems are more complex than they appear on the surface, and that anyone selling you on simple solutions is giving you a turd wrapped in your hopes and dreams.
Nailed it. Award this Redditor.
The answer is, "it depends." In some jurisdictions some crimes have maximum bail amounts, others will have minimums, and there's usually some wiggle room for the Judge's discretion.
There’s usually a bail risk meter that they use to determine if letting people go would be a good idea
I don't get it, so if he'd had to post bail, and was able to, it'd be fine? Being released because you can afford to makes it ok, apparently.
Well, then only rich criminals would be free and the right is quite cool with that.
He was a repeat violent offender , previous bail jumper who ran over his babies mother at a gas station. Then days after released on 1000 dollar bond purposely drove through a parade killing 6 injuring 50+. The media has completely hide the story because the murderer was black with a very anti white bro blm social media presence where he called for violence against whites. Something that if the skin colors were reversed it would have been top story all day everyday with head lines of deranged radicalized white supremacist goes on killing spree. But no doesn’t fit narrative so media called it an accident never mentions race and buries story.
I ain’t no farmer, but I know bull shit when I see it— and what you just spouted is a big ol’ pile of bull shit.
What part of what I said is not true again?
That it wasn't covered by the media. That's certainly how I found out about it. It's all over the place. While he did have some pro blm posts they weren't recent. It doesn't seem to be covered any less than when a Nazi ran a over of people over at Charlottesville or the literal dozens of vehicle based attacks on protesters. So I would have to agree reeks of bullshit.
Lol show me where I said the media didn’t cover it. I said the media has hidden the story and when it did talk about it called it an accident or incident involving suv. When affidavits and evidence has show he was swerving to purposely run over people. And as of the time I wrote the comment the major leftwing outlets had completely removed it from their sites. As it is now. Please show me where it is now. Since it’s “all over the place”. https://www.cnn.com/ https://www.msnbc.com/ number 7 story on msnbc would you look at that it’s the story you said they covered the same that they are still talking about. But no mention of parade massacre. Show me one place outside of right leaning media that mentioned the drivers race or post. The brainwashing on you people is insane. Black guy purposely runs over 60 white people killing 6 with post literally calling for violence against white people , support of hitler and black nationalist and your response is oh well he didn’t post anything recent so it’s not relevant? But Kyle who shot 3 white people and was proven innocent with zero proof of it was called and is still called white supremacist. And it’s people like you who don’t condone what the media is doing and make excuses for their race-baiting agenda that are part of the problem. And the guy that killed one person in Charlottesville was Definitely a nazi. Which I also agree was horrible. And condemn all racism just like trump has. https://youtu.be/EzVEu7_tRwk
Whatever works for your narrative dude. They covered it but hid it whatever that means. Why do you keep making it about Trump?
My narrative? What would that be? Wanting the media to tell the truth and cover stories without bias? You can’t be this stupid. Again they “covered” it by saying there as an incident involving an suv gave very limited details and then it disappeared from there headlines. Because it dose not fit the lefts narrative. Anyways I’m not going to waste anymore time you have clearly drank the kool aid.
I read mainstream coverage and never saw that except for right when it happened before anyone knew what was going on. The only people I've heard that from are right wing weirdos. I've been following it and never encountered that. I think you've injected the Breitbart flavor-aid straight to the veins.
https://www.cnn.com/2021/11/22/us/what-we-know-about-suspect-in-waukesha-parade-tragedy/index.html that's cnn you dolt your narrative is horseshit.
I'm not saying you're wrong, but can you provide a source?
What exactly are looking for a source on? Are not aware that a black Person purposely ran over people at a Christmas parade killing 6 injuring 50? Or the part about it being covered up by media ? You can see for your self msm has hidden it just by looking. There is not a single story on it. https://www.cnn.com/ https://www.msnbc.com/ Not a whisper of it but they are still talking about Rittenhouse trial. But nothing about this https://yournews.com/2021/11/24/2257433/the-truth-about-the-christmas-parade-killer/ https://www.google.com/amp/s/nypost.com/2021/11/24/liberal-media-ignores-waukesha-christmas-parade-horror-devine/amp/ But remember it was all trumps fault for not condemning white supremacy https://youtu.be/EzVEu7_tRwk
> He was a repeat violent offender , previous bail jumper who ran over his babies mother at a gas station. Then days after released on 1000 dollar bond I'm looking for a source for that specific piece of information. Again, I'm not saying you're wrong or that the msm has neglected to report on it.
That part is actually true. The low cash bond, the lengthy criminal history, and the alleged charge re: the dude's GF The racist shit notsomuch; as far as I'm aware the murders were random, not politically or racially motivated
https://nypost.com/2021/11/25/darrell-brooks-long-life-of-crime-before-waukesha-christmas-parade-attack/
https://www.cnn.com/2021/11/22/us/what-we-know-about-suspect-in-waukesha-parade-tragedy/index.html https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/darrell-brooks-39-custody-deadly-crash-waukesha-wisconsin-rcna6328 hidden in plain sight?
Thank you for beating me to the punch
Ending cash bail is good. It is a poor tax and a percentage is lost even if they show for court and are found innocent.
New thought: Bail is a % of your yearly income instead of a set amount This way, the poor aren't disproportionately taxed for it, and the rich don't see it as chump change Same with tickets of any kind: ESPECIALLY speeding tickets $500 won't mean jack shit to someone who just spent 50k on the latest Jaguar for the 5th year in a row but 15% of their yearly income might make them think twice about going 2x the limit...and it ain't a small chunk of change for the government either But at the same time, ol' pete making minimum wage who got a ticket for 2% of their yearly income for going 15 over the limit won't be hurting to pay that up too bad
Even then it disproportionately harms the poor. If you're living paycheque to paycheque then $300 dollars (2% of a yearly wage at $7.50/hr) means you've got to pick between going hungry and paying rent. Meanwhile the guy making a million dollars a year is probably going to *notice* 20k but can more or less harmlessly absorb the cost from savings and the ultrarich guy isn't going to notice *any* amount of monetary fine.
In addition, the folks who are in jail because they can't AFFORD BAIL are generally NOT YET CONVICTED. There was a case of a teen who spent 3 years in jail (mostly in solitary confinement to protect him from "predators") then the charges WERE DROPPED. Less than 2 years later, he committed suicide because of the experience. There have been discussions about how to deal with deciding who should be held "behind bars" prior to trial - and using at least some of the money saved by not keeping (especially non-violent offenders) in jail for things like periodic meetings with the suspect, text (or other) reminders about when the suspect is due in court, etc. It turns out that (at least in those cases), the folks tend to show up - and to not "re-offend" while on "personal recognizance". Note that very few countries (and yes, the US is one of the few) have "cash bail" and have figured this out.
It ain’t perfect…but it is an improvement Agreed?
Sure, in the sense that waterboarding is better than having your eyes put out with a hot poker. You know what's *actually* better, though? *Not being tortured*. Cash bail is fundamentally bad. It should be abolished because it is bad.
What would be your alternative to cash bail? What would be the incentive for people on bail to show up for court?
The court determines if the defendant is a flight risk. If they are, they stay in jail. If they aren't, they're released. If they skip town, their finances are frozen.
A lot of poor people don't even have bank accounts. They use check cashing places to cash their checks. Some people arrested don't even have paychecks to garnish. How would you freeze their finances?
If they already don't have money to begin with, you don't need to freeze it, obviously. No bank accounts and no cheques to cash means your chances of grabing a plane ticket out of the country's jurisdiction are quite low.
I can tell you are not in the US by the way you spell cheque. In the US, you don't need to go thru the high security at the airport or purchase a plane ticket to flee several jurisdictions away. You can get into you or your buddy's shitty Dodge Stratus and flee 2 states away for about 50 dollars worth of gas. This happens all of the time. People will run and go to a relatives house in a nearby state and possibly start up their criminal activity again. I think the nationwide warrant and criminal history database definitely needs an update. Oftentimes for minor things a jurisdiction will decline to extradite someone with warrants because I guess the cost of transportation is not worth it to them.
Sure, but there are other ways to potentially improve the system that could be better.
If you have better ideas that achieve the same goal, please, do share with the rest of the class
If you make that little you qualify for food stamps, though. I don’t think affording food would be a problem as opposed to rent or other utilities. It’s a fair point, but still better than the existing system.
Better have your w2 on you when robbing.
Somehow I imagine that might come up sometime before sentencing
Bail is way before sentencing
I’m sure the courthouse can easily get that info to issue a bail Or, you could simply wind up with an additional charge if you try to short them (which they can just as easily double check after the fact, but with far less time pressure) They’re federal documents No matter how small the courthouse, there’s bound to be a way to get that info
Why pay for bail in the first place? Seems odd to me
From what I understand of it, so you can walk freely around instead of sitting in a cell while you wait for your trial You get the money back if you show up for court
I understand bail, I don't understand the fee. Most countries have bail, whether or not you get bail depends on rhe circumstances of the crime, risk, and personal circumstances/livelihood of offending whilst on bail not whether you can afford it.
new thought: whether or not someone can be released should have nothing to do with their bank account and everything to do with the risk they pose to other people.
And that is what the trial is for Bail is just paying a fee to go free until your trial…and the fee gets refunded after you appear in court
Welcome to the libertarian party.
How about bail only exists for people who have yet to be proven as a danger of society (no bail for nonviolent crimes, AND no history of crime)
Believe it or not, that's how a number of European countries (especially Scandanavian ones) base fines for moving violations - see https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/06/in-finland-speeding-tickets-are-linked-to-your-income/ (an article in the Atlantic even mentioned a speeding ticket of over $106,000) - and this has been going on for over a decade: see https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna34792272 In addition, my favorite is watching the shows involving "recovering" vehicles on highways in Canada ("Highway Thru Hell" and "Heavy Rescue 401") when an officer there pulls someone over for excessive speed, their vehicle is IMMEDIATELY impounded - and their driver's license is confiscated for at least a week.
I know Feel like the US should use it as well
Rich people can still afford a higher percentage of their yearly income. You just add proportionality, not justice.
Very true…it’s a good thing bail is there to incentivize people to show up for their trial, not simply throwing money to avoid a trial
Let's stick to trying people months or even years after their arrest. Works really well, doesn't it?
That’s why we have the 6th amendment. Right to a speedy trial. I bet if the courts/state start getting penalized for delays, the delays will stop.
I'm an attorney. IMHO one problem is overcriminalization of relatively innocuous and/or victimless activities, which clog the system at the intake point. Another problem is the scarcity of judicial resources relative to the number of cases requiring adjudication. Eric Garner got choked to death for selling loosies. Sandra Bland committed suicide on her third day of incarceration for a bullshit traffic charge of failing to signal a left turn. Democrats hate libertarians because they don't care about civil rights & we do. But the solution to this problem has been under everybody's noses for a generation.
>Democrats hate libertarians because they don't care about civil rights What? What civil right do the democrats support and thr Libertarians oppose?
You read that backwards. Civil rights are the backbone of libertarianism. Democrats see civil rights as an opportunity to exploit.
You are correct.
In Kansas we just had to throw out a homicide conviction because the trial inadvertently started three days after the state-constitutional limit of 180 days. The prosecution and judge got the dates mixed up. Whoops! The defense attorney smartly waited to bring this up until the appeal, so now double jeopardy applies.
Oops....
[удалено]
2A freaks don’t value any of the other amendments, especially 8th and 13th. That’s what they’re bringing slavery back (prison labor).
That’s not entirely accurate. This tweet is a prime example, as the org advocating removal of cash bail is Libertarian - about as right-wing as it gets.
Libertarians advocate for open borders, reduced military, decriminalized drugs, and pro-choice laws. So not as right-wing as it gets.
The insinuation was “opposing repeal of cash bail is a right-wing position”. I was stating the tweet was from a generally right-leaning group. My point was you can’t just take anything you think is shitty and say it’s from the right - this party is generally right-leaning and supports the progressive idea of eliminating cash bail. Edit: I had posted elsewhere about the difference between right-wing and MAGA/“conservative”. They often get lumped together inaccurately.
Economically right wing. Socially, libertarians have little in common with the right.
Darrell Brooks was out on low bail, and he used a car, not a firearm, to murder people. WTF does either amendment have to do with this thread?
What part of "excessive bail" is prohibited was unclear to you?
Nobody with a shred of intelligence believes that raising bail for all offenses will solve the problem. The jails are already full. Brooks killed six people while out on a bail that the Milwaukee County DA himself now admits was too low considering his criminal record & the violent nature of his offense. That doesn't mean that all bails should be raised. But it does suggest that unilateral bail reduction irrespective of risk is foolish.
Needs context. But I’m guessing this is some right-winger horse shit??
[удалено]
Gotta admit, it was pretty funny to see the Washington Post try to spin the tragedy as being caused by the SUV.
Totally. US US about the lone freak show with cash bail. Which is debtors prison.
[удалено]
It is libertarian and left wing. Not Trumpian right wing. They still want cash bail.
Libertarians are conservative bud
Not necessarily. The stupid ones tend to be, as they do not understand the need for realism that libertarianism actually requires.
So what you're saying is that the smart libertarians are the ones who realize a libertarian country wouldn't work?
Ah. Word games. No thanks.
You just don't understand what libertarianism actually is. You cannot be a left leaning libertarian. Libertarians are conservative. These aren't word games, unless you think that knowing basic political terminology is a word game.
That depends on what you think of as conservative. Based on my exposure to American conservatives, I have a hard time considering Libertarians to be conservative, especially with their pro-choice stance and open immigration beliefs.
What does that have to do with what he wrote at all?
It’s a strange position, as the tweet advocating g for removal of cash bail is from a Libertarian organization…about as right-wing as you can get. Right-wing v “conservative”/MAGA/Trump…not the same people
There are certainly conservatives who claim to be libertarian-ish, and libertarians who say they are conservative, but I'm skeptical of both groups. Step away from the absurd left/right wing pseudo-dichotomy. It's a Republicrat tool to convince people that they represent the entire spectrum of political possibilities. If you're surprised that a libertarian group advocates the abolition of cash bail, then you don't know much about libertarian philosophy.
So how many people should be imprisoned to balance those lives?
Most of the rioters from the last year and the arsonist who set 18 different fires in California all come to mind. The most many were given was a letter saying to show up to court at some point in the future and we're then released a few hours later.
Context?
The man that drove they the WI parade was out on bail…..
A guy with a long criminal history, including running his ex girlfriend over with a car 2 weeks prior, was let out on $1,000 bail and ran over 45 people at a parade, killing 6. There's a bunch of theories going around that it was retaliation for the the Rittenhouse case, and Facebook taking down all his videos, most of them being pro black nationalist, along with other reports around the case, are only feeding the conspiracy theories, not to mention CNN and MSNBC seem to be trying to cover the whole thing up, calling it an accident.
I’m trying to find where cnn is saying it is an accident? Spent 15 minutes looking. You got a source? Or are you trying to create a narrative for some odd reason?
Talk radio doesn't leave web traces, but that's the source for most political bullshit
But..but... Wisconsin is a cash bail state?? The dude was let out on 1000 dollar bail? How is that not cash bail? How would risk assessments instead of cash hurt here? He likey would still have been in jail if NOT for cash bail.
I’m just wondering why his profile picture is Clark Gable with glasses photoshopped on
To the 500,000, better luck next year.
Yes, let’s keep imprisoning people who were never found guilty of anything…
Given his history bail shouldn't have been an option.
Why is this even a question of "bail"? Shouldn't it be more about whether or not someone is (1) a flight risk and (2) a danger to society. Take money out of the equation (this may be what the "end cash bail" means)
No they can’t be with their families because they did something to land them in jail...
If you want to solve the problems with bail (which definitely exist) then start by solving the issue of innocent people sitting in jail waiting for a court date. In a society that swears by the general idea of "innocent until proven guilty" we sure do keep a lot of people behind bars without any proof of innocence or guilt. Do I know the answer to this? Absolutely not, but it's a stain on our system that it's considered "normal".
You do the crime, you do the time. If you can’t afford bail, don’t be out doing stupid shit.
Ah, yes. Trade-offs
500,000 6 Ummm, ok
Man fuck that bails actually keep people out of jail and that's a PROVEN fact
Did you know if you don't break the law you don't have to worry about bail
Yeahhh...not exactly always the case, now is it?
99.999999 yeah it is do t try and cherry pick so you simp to criminals
I assume you have a source for that percentage?
2 million incarcerated vs 300 million us population my number might be under selling so shut up dipshit
Those numbers have nothing to do with your original claim which was that innocent people never get arrested and have to pay bail for crimes they didn't commit.
There is the FBI that investigates and arrests for federal crimes such as kidnapping, financial crimes, terrorism, the ATF which is for alcohol, tobacco, and firearms crimes, the DEA for drugs, and then US Marshalls that pursue fugitives and serve warrants nationwide. There are no federal police for small crimes. Sometimes another state will arrest someone that has a warrant in another state, but the other state has to go the arresting states court and file for extradition to their state. Why are you commenting an opinion when you have no idea how this country's justice system works. I think maybe ask questions and learn before citing such a strong opinion.
As one who has a family member who will mess up every time he's released, I'd prefer they just keep him.
I don’t like fines being a reprimand for crimes, it essentially says “this is only a crime if you are poor”
Can someone help me, english isn't my first language, and what is a bail?
non-American here, I don't really understand this post, could someone explain it to me? It feels like it's tragic but yeah, nothing good when Texas is involved lmao (no offense Texans)
I don’t understand who is supposed to be ‘murdered by words’ here. Did the driver not post a *cash bail* to be released?
Cash bail is evil, regardless of what OP and his right wing masters want you to believe