Grass8989 OP t1_jdxe54r wrote
“An overwhelming majority of New Yorkers appear to want Albany Democrats to overhaul bail reform, a new poll shows — giving Gov. Kathy Hochul ammo for budget talks to try to force more change.
Seventy-two percent of Empire State residents support giving judges more discretion to set bail for those accused of serious crimes — with a breakdown of 76% of Democrats, 71% of independents and 69% of Republicans, according to the Siena College poll.
Related changes were supported across every demographic covered by the survey of 802 registered voters. The poll had a margin of error of 4.6%, including race, sex, religion, religion, and geography.
Almost all New Yorkers – 92% – believe crime is “very serious” or “somewhat serious” of a problem statewide, while 65% say the same about their own community.
The 65% of black New Yorkers who favor more judicial discretion were the smallest majority of any group.
“For more than a year, at least 90% of voters have said crime is a serious problem in the state, at least 60% say very serious,” Siena College pollster Steven Greenberg said.”
Neoliberalism2024 t1_jdxi92z wrote
Lmao democrats support this even more than republicans.
Sorry progressives, we tried it your way, and it was a huge failure, that got countless people hurt and murdered. Time to give control of the party back to the sane democrats.
Just4Kicks_Today t1_jdxxj5q wrote
You’ll see a huge shift in the Asian and Jewish vote soon. They are tired of seeing criminals on the streets. Just watch
BakedBread65 t1_jdy89iw wrote
Soon? It already happened. These “reforms” are a big reason republicans won so many house seats in NY.
Just4Kicks_Today t1_jdyo7h0 wrote
You will be glad to hear they haven’t come out in full force yet. It’s only the beginning. Liberal policies do nothing for the Asian American communities. They use to all campaign for blue. They haven’t openly come out to campaign red but they sure as hell will over the next couple of years
-
Crime on our elders and seeing the accused being let out even after countless footage being shared around. It is demoralizing to continually see
-
Specialized High Schools mean nothing now and more and more leave the city to go into Long Island
-
Jails and homeless shelters being built right in our Chinatown
We are all about mind your own business but now it’s affecting our business
Asians only care about education and safety. Each ethic group have their own agendas and the liberals definitely do not support the Asian community at all. The one good thing about America is the democracy and that each person gets the vote for what they believe in. I do not blame anyone for voting the way they do based off of what they believe and what benefits them. At the same time they can not ignore why Asians will stop supporting progressive reform. Majority wins and that’s how it should be. Either prove they care or watch the change
I hope liberal leaders read this or scroll through Reddit because this is on you guys for alienating our voice and vote. Be afraid our numbers are growing
Down voting me won’t change the sentiment. You’ll see us in full force coming soon. Numbers won’t lie
numba1cyberwarrior t1_jdz7b7u wrote
>Asians only care about education and safety. Each ethic group have their own agendas and the liberals definitely do not support the Asian community at all
Its funny how the biggest losses were in Southern Brooklyn which are also communities like Russians, Jews, etc that also care mostly about education and safety.
1600hazenstreet t1_jdxrs46 wrote
Only reason they care now, is the voters are fed up, and voting them out of office.
Peking_Meerschaum t1_jdy0ejz wrote
We had our chance with Zeldin. He came so close, but a majority of voters would rather continue living under more crime than potentially be called racist. Also he wouldn't be trying to take away our natural gas heating and stoves, as an added bonus.
iv2892 t1_jdy49y9 wrote
Violent Crime is down for the year , and mostly flat on all other stats . Zeldin had some good proposals but I don’t think he would have made a difference other than firing Bragg. If Albany makes these changes , they will avoid losing in the next election. Democrats are just doing the smart thing here , otherwise they will get wiped out if they can’t listen to the polls
BakedBread65 t1_jdy8fue wrote
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/05/nyregion/new-york-crime-stats.html
Certain crimes are up, it’s just shooting and homicides that are down
iv2892 t1_jdyj81z wrote
Rapes are also down , and the ones that are up are not up by that much .
casanovaelrey t1_jdxn363 wrote
We've tried the "tough on crime" and "War on Drugs" angle for 40+ years. Sooooooo yeah, I don't know that 2 years is enough to undo decades of terrible conservative policies. Plus bail IS NOT PUNISHMENT. That's LITERALLY a violation of several constitutional amendments to impose a punishment before a sentence has been given by a judge.
That being said, the revolving door of people with 10,000 charges being let back out on the street is wild. There should be a precondition that people released must not commit new crimes and that certain crimes go through a separate review process to determine whether that person can safely be allowed to be released pretrial.
And before ANYONE says "well *insert number" people support it", I don't care. Not everyone knows the law and most people operate based on what they think the law is. But I digress.
The current dynamic can't continue but it can't continue anymore than the one favored by the conservatives for the last several decades can continue. We need to sit down and come up with policy divorced of politics and pleasing "the other side of the aisle". Or else we will end up having this discussion again.
Curiosities t1_jdxsbg4 wrote
Yep. A lot of people don't even know what bail is, especially that it's not punitive, and opportunistic politicians and media like the Post capitalize on that. You'll hear the same talking points - 'no consequences for criminals', 'they'll be out in a few hours', 'no consequences for crimes', 'soft on crime' etc but if you ask the people parroting those lines they're fed, how many of them could tell you what bail is, what its function is, what charges qualify, (and importantly under bail reform, the MANY charges that don't qualify for no bail)?
As well as the facts that arraigned suspects need to be tried, that they are legally innocent until proven guilty, that punishment comes after a conviction (or plea deal, because that's where 90%+ of convictions happen).
Too many people think that an arrest means guilty, when that's not how the legal system works, and also, the wrong people are sometimes arrested. The cops are among those saying this misinformation loudly, saying their hands are tied, can't do their jobs, etc when they often slack off and refuse to do their job (a local chain that has had theft can't rely on the cops coming to take their reports), and part of their job is working to provide the DA with enough evidence to prove their cases.
casanovaelrey t1_jdxus9j wrote
Thank you. I have nothing to add. You're right on the money here.
AceContinuum t1_jdyjq9n wrote
>The cops are among those saying this misinformation loudly, saying their hands are tied, can't do their jobs, etc when they often slack off and refuse to do their job (a local chain that has had theft can't rely on the cops coming to take their reports)
The journalists are also complicit in this. Every time a cop claims their "hands are tied," the immediate response should be to ask the cop to explain how exactly the bail reform law "tied their hands." Which provision takes away cops' power to investigate? Which provision takes away cops' power to arrest? Which provision makes shoplifting "legal"?
The uncritical mainstream media narrative of bail reform "tying the hands of law enforcement" is one of the most in-your-face examples of propaganda - copaganda - I've ever seen.
mule_roany_mare t1_jdy1f9v wrote
We need to get rid of bail bondsmen
-
they inflate the amount of bail necessary by a ridiculous amount
-
they keep their fee no matter what
Just set bail to be a sufficient amount to keep a person from running & return it all in full when they show up to court. There is no reason a person should pay a bail bondsmen 10k to cover their 500k bail.
Bail bondsmen shouldn't be picking up bail-jumpers either. That should be law enforcement's job.
TLDR
Bail is just supposed to ensure people show up to court & make it too expensive onerous to run.
It's not a fee for the privilege to waiting for trial outside jail.
IRequirePants t1_jdxzehv wrote
> We've tried the "tough on crime" and "War on Drugs" angle for 40+ years
And all we got to show for it is the lowest murder rate in almost a century.
SuckMyBike t1_jdz3eym wrote
Every other developed country currently also has their lowest murder rate in a century. But they are locking up 10x fewer people than the US is.
In fact, despite by far having the highest prison population of any country (and it's not even close), the US still has the highest homicide rates of any developed country.
It's almost as if it's not working at all. If locking more people up was working, then the US should have the lowest crime rates of developed countries, not the highest.
IRequirePants t1_je0l9p9 wrote
>Every other developed country currently also has their lowest murder rate in a century. But they are locking up 10x fewer people than the US is
There is a million and a half reasons why this is. Edit: Since the comment was deleted - there are a million and half reasons why the US and other western countries have different circumstances
>It's almost as if it's not working at all.
The (until recently) record low homicide rate begs to differ.
SuckMyBike t1_je0li2b wrote
This post is pathetic. On the one hand you claim that there are a million reasons why crime rates are low in other countries, but then you go and claim that the US crime rate being low is thanks to putting people in prison.
Fucking pathetic.
fafalone t1_jdyt29l wrote
Computer technology got us the lowest murder rate in a century.
What, you can't just impute causation to whatever has a correlation?
Studied directly, the war on drugs has been an epic disaster, and crime fell entirely independent of it.
The murder rate fell despite the war on drugs funneling trillions to gangs and cartels, making them more powerful than ever.
IRequirePants t1_jdyux74 wrote
> Computer technology got us the lowest murder rate in a century.
COMPSTAT certainly helped.
I guess the difference here is that "War on Drugs" directly funneled money into police. It isn't tangential. It's directly related.
Now, if you want to say the War on Drugs had massive amounts of waste and other related societal harms, then sure. Over-incarceration, "stop-and-frisk" violations, etc.
RoozGol t1_jdxr3nd wrote
Failed? Has the crime not been constantly falling from the 80's? It started to pick up on again due to policy change. Data is clear
andydh96 t1_jdxsba5 wrote
Crime as a whole rose nationally during COVID. It's disingenuous (and incorrect) to imply that the increase in crime here is solely because of bail reform when crime also increased in non-bail reform states/cities.
mehkindaok t1_jdy20y8 wrote
Crime as a whole rose nationally when it got decriminalized.
TheAJx t1_jdymigp wrote
Okay, well COVID is over for most sane people now and has been for about a year. How do we address the issue of elevated levels of crime in this city?
SuckMyBike t1_jdz3tho wrote
>How do we address the issue of elevated levels of crime in this city?
Let's do that!
Criminologists have been in near uniform agreement for a while now: the biggest cause of crime is poverty.
So if you have any proposals on how to reduce poverty, I'd love to hear them
TheAJx t1_je08m0y wrote
How about this, can we address the proximate issues of crime, getting multiple time offenders off the streets, stopping shoplifters etc while we take on the huge task of reordering society to reduce poverty?
SuckMyBike t1_je0iht4 wrote
It sounds like you only want to do the first and not the second.
TheAJx t1_je0k68k wrote
I would like to do both, mainly because they are both important goals independent of each other.
I'm not particularly convinced about the povert -> crime argument in this case, given that poverty rates went down during COVID thanks to massive government cash infusions.
SuckMyBike t1_je0kwe5 wrote
How on earth can someone in 2023 still question the direct correlation between poverty and crime?!
What the fuck .. this is basic knowledge amongst criminologists. Have you never spoken to one?
TheAJx t1_je0oeiu wrote
Bangladesh and Ghana are pretty poor, but not particularly violent either.
Poverty went Down during COVID yet crime skyrocketed. Poverty went up significantly in 2008 but crime did not spike at nearly the same levels (and went down within a year or two).
> Have you never spoken to one?
You guys are all the same, thinking that sociology professors have all the answers to society's problems. Crimnologists have also found that hiring more police on the streets leads to less crime. Are you in favor of that?
SuckMyBike t1_je0oom1 wrote
>Crimnologists have also found that hiring more police on the streets leads to less crime.
Actually, criminologists concistently find that repression is a very weak correlator with reducing crime rates.
But what do you care. You just invent your own facts based on your gut feeling and then think you know everything. Fuck off
NetQuarterLatte t1_je0jz62 wrote
COVID happened worldwide, but crimes didn’t rise worldwide.
If your logic about the bail reform is right, then you must also conclude that COVID is not what caused crimes to rise.
andydh96 t1_je0ttky wrote
You either didn't ready my comment carefully or purposely misinterpreted it, so I'll make it easier for you.
I said bail reform is not the SOLE CAUSE of crime increase -- that's easy to see from crime stats nationally that likewise show increases in non-bail reform states and locales. But neither did I say that COVID was the sole cause -- that too would be disingenuous and an overly-simplistic conclusion (same as your stance which seems to be only blaming bail reform). Effects can have multiple causes -- this is why statistical analyses exist to calculate how much of the increase we can attribute to one factor versus another.
I would suggest against looking at global crime statistics, its like comparing apples and oranges (besides the fact that reported data for many countries are unreliable). Too many different variables across countries makes the comparison far less useful than comparing among states for making policy decisions based off those statistical trends.
NetQuarterLatte t1_je1oi53 wrote
The gist is that you were trying to associate covid and crimes.
I get that you’re saying it’s not the sole cause, but even if factually true (your statement would still be technically true if Covid was not a cause at all), it’s still misleading in the overarching context of the conversation.
Even in the US, Covid didn’t hit every city at the same time. The staggered manner in which Covid hit US locations can be used to show a causal relationship of Covid and Crimes, if that exists. However there’s basically no evidence of that.
In fact, NYC got Covid waves earlier than most cities. But even in 2022 we had crimes still rising in NYC faster than other big cities like LA, Chicago and Miami.
andydh96 t1_je26v7v wrote
I'm sorry but objectively speaking, what you are saying isn't fully accurate. COVID shut down the national economy. As is typically the case when the economy and employment rates decline, crime goes up and COVID and its short term effects were no exception. Making it sound like we should be beyond COVID is a bit of an over-simplification -- yes in theory we are beyond the pandemic stage but we are still suffering from indirect effects particularly with the economy, supply-chain issues, etc. I think sane minds can agree the economy still hasn't recovered fully. Just because we aren't dealing with something in our faces doesn't mean its effects aren't there. The timing of the COVID waves too isn't really relevant - neither NYC nor the rest of the country operates within its own bubble, just not how society or economies work. When NYC shut down first, it still had ripple effects across the country despite the virus not being nationally widespread yet.
On an aside, I also question the validity of your statement about our crime rates increasing at a larger rate compared to other large US cities but I don't have hard statistics to support my skepticism. Care to link for my own education?
NetQuarterLatte t1_je36b3j wrote
Here's a comparison of the increase in violent felonies across those cities during 2022 compared to 2021: https://imgur.com/a/YbvYifw
If your hypothesis linking of Covid to crimes depends on the economy, you can look at the economy directly. Poverty in the US dropped to 20-year lows (https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/PPAAUS00000A156NCEN) during Covid. That puts a dent in the supposed link between economics and crimes nationwide.
But crimes, in NYC at least, climbed to 20-year highs for some crimes.
[deleted] t1_jdxui19 wrote
[deleted]
casanovaelrey t1_jdxulur wrote
I would answer this but the person right below you (above this answer) answered what I would have said.
TheAJx t1_jdymarc wrote
> We've tried the "tough on crime" and "War on Drugs" angle for 40+ years.
Not a fan of the war on drugs, but "tough on crime" over the last 40 years or so has been pretty effective. Homicide rate basically cut in half since the early 90s. Violent crime in cities like NYC and LA down like 80% off their peaks. It's so weird to see people act like the last few decades have been abject failures in policing. Crime rates are a many-decade lows. Incarceration rate is at its lowest point since the mid 90s.
SuckMyBike t1_jdz3ned wrote
Crime rates in all other countries dropped just like it did in the US. But they didn't use a "tough on crime" approach to achieve it.
The more likely explanation for why both the US and other countries saw declining crime rates is the banning of lead gasoline and improvements in economic prosperity.
To criminologists, it is also no surprise that crime has been up since the pandemic. Crime rates also saw an uptick during the 2008 financial crisis.
Bad economic times = more crime. Other countries are experiencing a similar uptick in crime without any "bail reform". Surely the recent uptick in crime in Finland isn't caused by NY bail reform, is it?
TheAJx t1_je0de7g wrote
I only call it "tough on crime" because that's the terminology you guys use and you guys continue to insist that it was some sort of failure. I think better policing over the last 30-40 years has been pretty effective.
>Crime rates also saw an uptick during the 2008 financial crisis.
The uptick in crime was nowhere near as bad as it was in the last few years. And it quickly waned, leading to continued lower crime rates.
>banning of lead gasoline and improvements in economic prosperity.
Was there a bunch of lead that entered the system in 2020?
Due to CARES ACT, PPP and stimulus checks, poverty rates and household debt decreased. Incomes actually rose (an unemployed person was earning a minimum of $600 / weekly).
>Bad economic times = more crime. Other countries are experiencing a similar uptick in crime without any "bail reform". Surely the recent uptick in crime in Finland isn't caused by NY bail reform, is it?
Did other countries see 20-30% increases in homicides like the US did? Maybe Finland did . . its hard to extrapolate based of one country with a population about the size of Brooklyn and Queens. TO my knowledge, no large countries experienced the surge in crime to the levels the US did.
SuckMyBike t1_je0l4ns wrote
>I think better policing over the last 30-40 years has been pretty effective. .
10x more people in prison per Capita than Germany and yet way higher crime rates?
You call that a success? Man, your parents must've put the bar for your achievements insanely low
TheAJx t1_je0o0ce wrote
>10x more people in prison per Capita than Germany and yet way higher crime rates?
We have far more guns on the streets than Europe.
>You call that a success? Man, your parents must've put the bar for your achievements insanely low
Like I said, violent crime in NYC fell by 80%. I'm happy for that. Maybe you're mad because more criminals went to jail.
SuckMyBike t1_je0otwe wrote
I'm mad because sad people like yourself are preventing the US from reforming the prison system to be in line with other developed countries.
.instead, you want to keep a prison system that dictators use.
frost5al t1_jdy3vzj wrote
>come up with a policy devoid of politics
>policy
>devoid
>of politics
lol
Peking_Meerschaum t1_jdxzked wrote
It's simple physics, though. If someone is locked in a secure box away from the general public, their ability to inflict injury upon said public drops to zero.
> I don't know that 2 years is enough to undo decades of terrible conservative policies.
We were never truly "tough on crime." It's time to try to Singapore model, enough is enough.
AceContinuum t1_jdym2ro wrote
>It's time to try to Singapore model, enough is enough.
You mean the "Singapore model" of having 80% of the city's population living in high-quality public housing, supported by a truly universal and affordable state-run healthcare system?
That could actually work. It would go a long way toward providing increased stability and, as a result, reducing crime.
But somehow I feel like you're referring more to things like putting people in jail for selling gum, downloading porn or criticizing the Mayor.
Peking_Meerschaum t1_jdyp90p wrote
Absolutely, I fully agree with this deal. Singapore's HDB Scheme of public housing is one of the most successful urban planning programs in modern history. But you should understand what you are suggesting, because it is probably different than how you're envisioning it.
It is important to understand that Singapore's HDB system is truly meritocratic, it isn't just a handout of free housing, but rather a form of lend-lease whereby Singapore citizens can apply for subsidized housing after meeting social criteria such as being married, and not having been convicted of a serious crime, and agreeing to abide by the rules and regulations of the housing program and the state, which are vigorously enforced by a network of community patrols and cameras. Also, married citizens who have more than two children are given priority.
If we couple this program with Singapore's robust and judicious use of corporal punishment (caning) for crimes such as vandalism and sexual assault, and the death penalty for drug dealing, then I really think we might be off to a good start. I would love to see NYCHA housing being as judiciously and equitably dispensed to good virtuous citizens as are Singapore's HDB flats, and I would love to see those who piss in and graffiti the NYCHA elevators and stairwells get the cane, and I would love to see those who deal drugs in the NYCHA halls get the death penalty.
SuckMyBike t1_jdz3yg5 wrote
> We were never truly "tough on crime."
-> US literally has a 10x higher incarceration rate than Germany
-> US was never tough on crime
You're insane
Peking_Meerschaum t1_je01cgn wrote
I didn't say incarceration
WickhamAkimbo t1_je0039l wrote
> Time to give control of the party back to the sane democrats.
Time to give it back to the adults. The NYU student progressives have no life experience, no sense of nuance, and laughably poor critical thinking skills and shouldn't be anywhere near the levers of power for their own good and the good of everyone else.
poeticspider t1_jdy23le wrote
Put the adults back in charge.
huebomont t1_jdyfv7d wrote
There’s still not evidence tying a rise in crime to bail reform and people’s opinions are almost exclusively influenced by the media they consume which has been on a non-stop campaign to reverse bail reform for years.
But yeah, let’s go back to the system that didn’t work for 40 years because you think this one didn’t work for what, 2?
Grass8989 OP t1_jdyh9o6 wrote
Statistics came out that there has been more recidivism amongst violent offenders since bail reform.
“The one exception was for bail-eligible people who were released following recent violent felony arrests. The rate of rearrests for that cohort of offenders increased slightly.”
Rottimer t1_jdyu9sm wrote
Yep, those high murder states of Missouri, Mississippi, Louisiana, Arkansas, what with all their progressive bail reform. . .
oh wait. . .
Oisschez t1_jdym1qb wrote
Would you shut up man, we’ve done it your way too, for the 50 odd years preceding bail reform.
Shocking that bail reform doesn’t work in a vacuum, and we need a complete overhaul of our criminal justice system for it to truly work. The machine Democrats do not work for me or you or the “countless people hurt and murdered”, as if bail reform that has anything to do with the root causes of crime.
The same democrats you speak of are corporate stooges who do not give a shit about you
Oslopa t1_jdxjsu5 wrote
Sure, let’s jump into a tough on crime policy, despite the evidence not showing that bail reform has been the problem. It’s an emotional reaction leading to a knee jerk over-correction.
Elizasol t1_jdxlki9 wrote
When there are many people walking the streets with 100+ arrests, I think it's safe to conclude there is something wrong with bail
mehkindaok t1_jdy2tnj wrote
It’s all part of the green new deal - connect the revolving door of justice to a generator and it will power the entire state!
huebomont t1_jdyg14b wrote
Even though the rise in crime happened in states without bail reform too?
casanovaelrey t1_jdxnk3j wrote
Opposed to people consistently being wrongly convicted or held for YEARS on charges that are then dropped due to lack of evidence. Bail is NOT PUNISHMENT. We need to do something but we need an original idea.
Bma1500 t1_jdxpbzp wrote
New York grants the right to a speedy trial known as 180.80. You demand that the DA gather their evidence and indict you within 6 days or you walk free.
If you’re wrongfully arrested, invoke that and tell them to put up or shut up
casanovaelrey t1_jdxr5g8 wrote
I know about this. Unfortunately I think you misunderstand what "wrongfully arrested" means here. It means you were arrested and/or convicted for a cringe you did not commit. If the DA has evidence that they claim link you to the crime insert Central Park 5, Richard Rosario, etc then this law wouldn't apply. Also everyone doesn't know if this law (and often public defenders as agents of the state pressure innocent people to take deals). There are too many moving parts. The system is broken and running back to something that doesn't work is not the best move.
Oslopa t1_jdxr0xo wrote
When I make up whatever facts suit my predetermined conclusion, I also find that arguments are easy to win!
Elizasol t1_jdy8w6z wrote
Either you don't actually live here or you haven't been keeping up with the news over the past few years
Oslopa t1_jdyoi07 wrote
I live here and am familiar with the NYPost-type coverage, which usually cherry-picks examples and glosses over important details. You’re reacting, not thinking.
Elizasol t1_jdyop69 wrote
> When there are many people walking the streets with 100+ arrests, I think it's safe to conclude there is something wrong with bail
sternfan1523 t1_jdxn3sd wrote
you can't have bail reform but also not allow for them to have discretion on if they are likely to be a violent risk. It's one or the other.
ffzero58 t1_jdxn8pe wrote
Whoever implemented this version of bail reform did not do a thorough job of closing out some odd loopholes. However, bail reform did help a very high number of folks who were first time offenders to not lose their jobs and livelihood. I hope the next iteration of reforms will fix these issues - especially the career criminals and repeat offenders.
mehkindaok t1_jdy33g7 wrote
It showed the first time offenders there is zero consequence consequence and turns them into 100th time offenders.
SmurfsNeverDie t1_jdxn84g wrote
When its your family member that gets stabbed because someone with a violent record got off easily ill hear you out
[deleted] t1_jdxmj6h wrote
[deleted]
casanovaelrey t1_jdxncb9 wrote
EXACTLY. But that's what conservatives do best. Knee-jerk, fear monger, and overcorrect based on how many people of the "others" they can hurt in the process.
Grass8989 OP t1_jdxpdfh wrote
“with a breakdown of 76% of Democrats, 71% of independents and 69% of Republicans, according to the Siena College poll.”
Conservatives?
casanovaelrey t1_jdxqeka wrote
> And before ANYONE says "well *insert number" people support it", I don't care. Not everyone knows the law and most people operate based on what they think the law is. But I digress.
DEFINITELY must have missed this part in your quest to be right.
Also the "Tough on crime" and "War on Drugs" legacy conservative policies and a cornerstone of ANYTHING they talk about. So I stand by my comments.
Peking_Meerschaum t1_jdxzyzo wrote
You can't just hand-wave away the will of a significant majority of all voters because they don't have NYU law degrees. Luckily it doesn't matter if you don't care what the majority of residents of this state want, we still live in a democracy and the majority rules.
Misommar1246 t1_jdxh6f1 wrote
Finally something most of us agree on it seems: judges should have more discretion in bail sentencing. Criminals with violent crime records should not be allowed bail or if bail must be set, it should be set to a very high number.
Tobar_the_Gypsy t1_jdym1i4 wrote
Just make two options: no bail or no release. It’s not difficult.
Salt-Temperature-481 t1_jdykqvf wrote
Yet nothing will be done about. The only way politicians act on anything is when it hits them personally or close to home.
TheAJx t1_jdylls5 wrote
> Seventy-two percent of Empire State residents support giving judges more discretion to set bail for those accused of serious crimes — with a breakdown of 76% of Democrats, 71% of independents and 69% of Republicans, according to the Siena College poll.
Correct me if I' wrong, but didn't the evidence show that giving judges "discretion" actually leads to more violent criminals getting out on bail. Just make the rules tougher and have judges enforce them.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments