Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

California governor signs overhaul of bail system

latimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 208 posts

Re: California governor signs overhaul of bail system

#191

Post by canhascodez »

WillPostForFood wrote: post #182
woodpanel wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with your first point: incremental changes are often for the better. Regarding your second: > Speaking of losing jobs, a whole industry just lost theirs Doesn't the legitimacy of the job come before the right to perform it? A whole industry just lost their jobs is probably what many said in 1833 after the passing of the Slavery Abolition Act.

I agree that legitimacy of the job comes first, but don't think bail bondsmen are illegitimate. They definitely aren't illegitimate if you think there should be bail system. Instead of comparing it to slavery (which is borderline Godwin's Law), I'd compare it to being a distiller when 18th amendment passed.

I reject that comparison. Bail is an administrative construct, not a physical substance. It is a "peculiar institution".

Re: California governor signs overhaul of bail system

#192

Post by dragonwriter »

WillPostForFood wrote: post #182
woodpanel wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with your first point: incremental changes are often for the better. Regarding your second: > Speaking of losing jobs, a whole industry just lost theirs Doesn't the legitimacy of the job come before the right to perform it? A whole industry just lost their jobs is probably what many said in 1833 after the passing of the Slavery Abolition Act.

I agree that legitimacy of the job comes first, but don't think bail bondsmen are illegitimate. They definitely aren't illegitimate if you think there should be bail system. Instead of comparing it to slavery (which is borderline Godwin's Law), I'd compare it to being a distiller when 18th amendment passed.

> They definitely aren't illegitimate if you think there should be bail system

Incorrect.

First, a bail system still will exist in California, just not a money bail system.

Second, most of the history of money bail didn't require up front payment and specifically prohibited those providing surety from getting paid.

So, yes, it's quite possible (and the historical norm) to both accept bail systems as legitimate—even specifically when money bail systems are seen as legitimate—and view anything like the current American profit-driven predatory lending and privatized fugitive apprehension industry surrounding it as quite illegitimate.

Re: California governor signs overhaul of bail system

#193

Post by dragonwriter »

WillPostForFood wrote: post #97
woodpanel wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And for these people, bail has zero impact on whether they show up for trial. All the while that 50$-based jail time has disastrous impact on their personal lives (losing jobs, eviction by landlords, more complicated interaction with police, three-strike-rules ....).

Well, then a common sense incremental change would be to drop or discourage those tiny bail amounts, not throw out the whole system. Speaking of losing jobs, a whole industry just lost theirs.

> Well, then a common sense incremental change would be to drop or discourage those tiny bail amounts,

Or, we could instead try replacing money bail in a relatively small jurisdiction (say, Washington, D.C.) for a number of years, and if it works well do it in a larger jurisdiction.

Once the first step of that has been done and shown to work, the case for smaller incremental steps in the next jurisdiction, though, is pretty weak. You seem to think we are at the point of considering a first practical test, but that step was taken years ago.

Re: California governor signs overhaul of bail system

#194

Post by namlem »

lurquer wrote: post #26

Instead of the duly appointed Judge making the decision, the power is delegated to a "Risk Assessment" board. (i.e., a bunch of unaccountable social workers). So, instead of an individual Judge getting flack for excessive bail, he can sleep at night having had his authority delegated to an anonymous 'committee' that can refuse to set bail altogether. It seems the general public -- at least in California -- has little…

In NJ we actually use an algorithm to determine whether someone gets bail. The system is designed so that most people are released with no bail, and the algorithm uses various risks factors to determine bail for those who do get pretrial detention.

Re: California governor signs overhaul of bail system

#195

Post by pc86 »

Alex3917 wrote: post #172
pc86 wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The original statement was "a very large percentage people in jail are there because their bail was literally $50 or $100 but they didn't have the money to pay it." So to determine the accuracy of that you need to see how many people are in jail specifically for failure to pay a very small bail amount. The fact that 32% are held on bail doesn't address the original point. From the linked source, page three: > When th…

Look at the stats from the Brooklyn Community Bail Fund and the Bronx Freedom Fund.

Given the choice between stats from the government and stats from organizations who clearly have an agenda...

Re: California governor signs overhaul of bail system

#196

Post by woolvalley »

jaxn wrote: post #186
woolvalley wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you call physical theft a violent or non-violent crime? How about if that theft involved property damage?

What is and isn't a violent crime is already well-defined. Mugging is a violent crime, but shoplifting isn't. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violent_crime

The thing is, I don't really care if people are using illegal substances or selling illegal services / objects between each other.

But I get pretty pissed off when someone steals my bike, smashes my car, wakes me up in the middle of the night or similar. These are not necessarily violent, but they still are things I feel like we should prevent more than the other types.

Re: California governor signs overhaul of bail system

#197

Post by mikevp »

TomMckenny wrote: post #46
swebs wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Judges can be recalled, though it is rare. It recently happened to the California judge who presided over the Brock Turner case over accusations that his sentence was not harsh enough. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People_v._Turner#Repercussions...

Another instance was the removal of 3 California supreme court justices[1], including the first woman, for over turning too many death penalties and ruling against insurance companies too often (although the TV campaign to remove focused only insufficient zeal about the death penalty.) [1]Rose Bird, Cruz Reynoso, Joseph Grodin

In the case of Rose Bird, at least, it wasn't "overturning too many death penalty cases", it was policy of a blanket rubber-stamp "overturned" on any and all death penalty cases. She was opposed to the death penalty, and was imposing her opinion on the matter over the law.

Re: California governor signs overhaul of bail system

#199

Post by TheCoelacanth »

cft wrote: post #159

Why do they bother to write (D-Van Nuys) after state senator names? (Van Nuys) would suffice. California is a one party socialist state.

Lol, what? Democrats have a super-majority, but there are still Republicans in office. I also haven't noticed much abolishment of private property or class going on in California, so the "socialist" part is inaccurate too.

Re: California governor signs overhaul of bail system

#200

Post by rdl »

pc86 wrote: post #165
Johnny555 wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mostly, getting people to show up for trial. Here's a section from the actual bill: A person released pursuant to the local rule of court shall be released on his or her own recognizance or on supervised own recognizance release ... A person shall not be required to pay for any nonmonetary condition or combination of conditions imposed pursuant to this section I believe Supervised Own Recognizance means that the defe…

If this ends up being a better system then I hope more states adopt it. But I don't see what's wrong with having someone pay for the GPS bracelet if they're required to wear it because it's deemed that they are likely to not come to court? Yes, it will be harder for some people to pay than others. Things cost money, I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing to charge the person using the service for that service, ev…

Pre-trial/pre-conviction, you're presumed innocent. The harm caused by arresting/detaining an ultimately-innocent person wrongly is so great that we should be doing everything we can to make conditions as good as possible for those people. Nothing should cost anything, and IMO jail (detention pre/during trial) should be 4-5 star hotel level, to the degree consistent with security.
Post reply on HN