Bail Reform Laws...What say you?

[Keukasmallie]

For starters I have a simple view of the bail reform bill and the tragic results so far:  Once ya' catch 'em, ya' gotta' keep 'em.🚫

 

I do understand the "no threat to society" concept, but it appears that a number of judges do not, e.g.,  an individual currently out on "bail" in response to a charge of illegal firearms shouldn't be allowed free pass bail AGAIN in response to an illegal firearms charge.  The George Soros-elected District Attorneys and judges are making it too easy for life-long criminals to contnue their careers as bad guys.

 

https://www.foxnews.com/us/new-york-city-parolee-shoots-boy-neck-guns

 

My views in this matter are based on my long-held value that No means No.

Edited November 24, 2021 by Keukasmallie

[Taro T]

3 minutes ago, Keukasmallie said:

For starters I have a simple view of the bail reform bill and the tragic results so far:  Once ya' catch 'em, ya' gotta' keep 'em.🚫

 

I do understand the "no threat to society" concept, but it appears that a number of judges do not, e.g.,  an individual currently out on "bail" in response to a charge of illegal firearms shouldn't be allowed free pass bail AGAIN in response to an illegal firearms charge.  The George Soros-elected District Attorneys and judges are making it too easy for life-long criminals to contnue their careers as bad guys.

 

My views in this matter are based on my long-held value that No means No.

 

As with most Liberal ideas, it sounds good as a concept, but the implementation ends up being FUBAR'd, quite possibly intentionally.  

[Billsandhorns]

5 minutes ago, Keukasmallie said:

For starters I have a simple view of the bail reform bill and the tragic results so far:  Once ya' catch 'em, ya' gotta' keep 'em.🚫

 

I do understand the "no threat to society" concept, but it appears that a number of judges do not, e.g.,  an individual currently out on "bail" in response to a charge of illegal firearms shouldn't be allowed free pass bail AGAIN in response to an illegal firearms charge.  The George Soros-elected District Attorneys and judges are making it too easy for life-long criminals to contnue their careers as bad guys.

 

https://www.foxnews.com/us/new-york-city-parolee-shoots-boy-neck-guns

 

My views in this matter are based on my long-held value that No means No.

It's a feature not a bug

[B-Man]

Wouldn't this thread be better in Current Events ?

 

 

Of course there’s also the question of why this man was not already in prison for a long, long time. The answer lies in policies put in place by enablers such as leftist DA John Chisholm of Milwaukee (Waukesha is basically a Milwaukee suburb):

“When we pay too little attention to the underlying causes and characteristics of individuals in the criminal justice system, we make significant errors, which can lead to greater problems,” Milwaukee County district attorney John Chisholm wrote in a 2019 paper about criminal justice reform.

That was before Chisholm conceded Monday that he had set an “inappropriately low” bail amount earlier this month when Darrell Edward Brooks Jr., the lead suspect in Sunday’s deadly car rampage in Waukesha, Wis., was arrested for domestic abuse and eluding police. Chisholm has been a leading figure among “progressive prosecutors,” leftwing lawmen who favor diversionary programs and community-building to locking up criminal defendants. His handling of the Brooks case is already sparking blowback to their growing influence over the justice system, much of which has been boosted by financial contributions from the leftwing billionaire George Soros.

Chisholm, who was elected in 2007, supports deferrals for some misdemeanors and “low-level” felonies in order to cut down on incarcerations. And he’s taken credit for inspiring a new wave of prosecutors in cities like San Francisco, St. Louis, and Philadelphia who have enacted similar reforms. Chisholm congratulated San Francisco district attorney Chesa Boudin following his election in 2019, and the pair spoke at a forum earlier this year on the status of the progressive prosecutor movement.

So this guy Chisholm is one of the earliest of the “reformers” in this movement. He apparently also knew and accepted that some people would get killed as a result of his policies:

“Is there going to be an individual I divert, or I put into [a] treatment program, who’s going to go out and kill somebody?” he told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel in 2007. “You bet. Guaranteed. It’s guaranteed to happen. It does not invalidate the overall approach.”

Collateral damage, he seems to be saying.

 

https://www.thenewneo.com/2021/11/23/waukesha-killer-darrell-brooks-enablers/

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[snafu]

It is going to be a big issue at the ballot box next November.

Brooks is the most visible example of the many times that bail reform has failed.  Any politician who supported bail reform has some fancy dancing to do in order to keep his or her office.

 

 

[Crap Throwing Clavin]

Like most things government touches: nice idea, badly &#%$ed up.

[Joe]

Isn't there a lawyer here always squawking about it?

 

I get bail reform for nonviolent offenders. But animals like the Waukesha guy deserve to remain locked up.

[TakeYouToTasker 2.0]

Yes, there are anecdotal examples of places bail reform has failed; but it is the right thing to do from the larger perspective for exactly the reasons in was implemented in the first place.

 

You can’t be both for small government and big incarceration.

[TakeYouToTasker 2.0]

@Joe

 

Your dopey emoji isn’t an argument, Joe.

 

The prison system is both an industry, and an exercise in judicial and prosecutory misconduct; and it shouldn’t be.

 

The Rittenhouse trial should have proved this to everyone.

 

The justice system doesn’t seek justice, it hunts in service of ideology and politics, and it abuses the poor.

 

Police lie, and DA’s over-charge. This is purposeful. Bail gets set, and innocent individuals take pleas in order that they don’t sit in cells awaiting trial because they can’t afford to.

 

This is the common case, and it’s a huge miscarriage of justice.

 

It’s why bail reform was necessary.

 

Of course there’s an anecdotal downside, but so is there for innocent until proven guilty.

 

Yes, some of the guilty will go free, but it serves to protect the innocent.

 

The Rittenhouse trial should have demonstrated this as well.

 

[Joe]

10 hours ago, TakeYouToTasker 2.0 said:

@Joe

 

Your dopey emoji isn’t an argument, Joe.

 

The prison system is both an industry, and an exercise in judicial and prosecutory misconduct; and it shouldn’t be.

 

The Rittenhouse trial should have proved this to everyone.

 

The justice system doesn’t seek justice, it hunts in service of ideology and politics, and it abuses the poor.

 

Police lie, and DA’s over-charge. This is purposeful. Bail gets set, and innocent individuals take pleas in order that they don’t sit in cells awaiting trial because they can’t afford to.

 

This is the common case, and it’s a huge miscarriage of justice.

 

It’s why bail reform was necessary.

 

Of course there’s an anecdotal downside, but so is there for innocent until proven guilty.

 

Yes, some of the guilty will go free, but it serves to protect the innocent.

 

The Rittenhouse trial should have demonstrated this as well.

 

Tell all that to the families of the dead. They should get first crack at putting that dog down.

[TakeYouToTasker 2.0]

36 minutes ago, Joe said:

Tell all that to the families of the dead. They should get first crack at putting that dog down.

Yeah. I don’t much care for dopey, emotional arguments.

[Crap Throwing Clavin]

2 hours ago, TakeYouToTasker 2.0 said:

Yeah. I don’t much care for dopey, emotional arguments.

 

Emotional arguments are what progressives make, which is why even their well-intended policies end up having FUBAR'd implementation.

[Joe]

7 hours ago, Crap Throwing Monkey said:

 

Emotional arguments are what progressives make, which is why even their well-intended policies end up having FUBAR'd implementation.

Like bail reform.

[Joe]

9 hours ago, TakeYouToTasker 2.0 said:

Yeah. I don’t much care for dopey, emotional arguments.

 

Your principles are worthless when innocents die because of them.

 

 

[TakeYouToTasker 2.0]

1 hour ago, Joe said:

 

Your principles are worthless when innocents die because of them.

 

 

More stupid sloganeering.

 

A reasonable person knows that innocents will always die, and that just law must be built on sound principles.

[TakeYouToTasker 2.0]

1 hour ago, Joe said:

Like bail reform.

Sweet, sweet Joe, thinking that DA’s and prosecutors aren’t corrupt.

[Joe]

26 minutes ago, TakeYouToTasker 2.0 said:

Sweet, sweet Joe, thinking that DA’s and prosecutors aren’t corrupt.

Sweet sweet Tasker, thinking that criminals won't game a weak bail system.

 

Libertarianism is a psychological operation.

 

What happened in Waukesha wasn't a bug of bail reform it was a feature.

 

 

 

 

[TakeYouToTasker 2.0]

20 minutes ago, Joe said:

Sweet sweet Tasker, thinking that criminals won't game a weak bail system.

 

Libertarianism is a psychological operation.

 

What happened in Waukesha wasn't a bug of bail reform it was a feature.

 

 

 

 

Imagine thinking human freedom was a PsyOp, and that weaponizing the justice system against innocent poor people was a virtue.

[KD in CA]

On 11/25/2021 at 5:11 AM, TakeYouToTasker 2.0 said:

Yes, there are anecdotal examples of places bail reform has failed; but it is the right thing to do from the larger perspective for exactly the reasons in was implemented in the first place.

 

You can’t be both for small government and big incarceration.

 

I don't doubt that some level of reform to the criminal system makes sense and can be a long term positive, but it sure doesn't seem like the dramatic shifts made in NY or CA (or apparently WI) have been very sensible.   Problem with liberals is they think they are obligated to go as full on bat-schit radical as possible until someone stops them.

Edited November 27, 2021 by KD in CA

[Keukasmallie]

On 11/25/2021 at 9:37 AM, TakeYouToTasker 2.0 said:

@Joe

 

Your dopey emoji isn’t an argument, Joe.

 

The prison system is both an industry, and an exercise in judicial and prosecutory misconduct; and it shouldn’t be.

 

The Rittenhouse trial should have proved this to everyone.

 

The justice system doesn’t seek justice, it hunts in service of ideology and politics, and it abuses the poor.

 

Police lie, and DA’s over-charge. This is purposeful. Bail gets set, and innocent individuals take pleas in order that they don’t sit in cells awaiting trial because they can’t afford to.

 

This is the common case, and it’s a huge miscarriage of justice.

 

It’s why bail reform was necessary.

 

Of course there’s an anecdotal downside, but so is there for innocent until proven guilty.

 

Yes, some of the guilty will go free, but it serves to protect the innocent.

 

The Rittenhouse trial should have demonstrated this as well.

 

 

The primary take away from the Rittenhouse trial, for me, is the unbridgeable gulf between the actual trial testimony and the fantasy webs spun by the MSM.  Of course, the facts clearly won out over the inept efforts of the prosecutor.  Rarely do the prosecutor's chief witnesses clearly support the defense point-for-point arguments.   Proven self defense should always lead to acquittal as it did in this case.

 

Additionally, I believe the days of DA's overcharging are long gone in those big city jurisdictions controlled by Soros-financed District Attorneys.  Overcharging has been replaced by failure to charge at all no matter the evidence presented by law enforcement in many instances.