Abolish the Cash Bail System • Hacker News Board

Re: Abolish the Cash Bail System

#131

Post by imtringued » Mon, Oct 12, 2020, 8:32 AM UTC

kepler1 wrote: post #84

ketzo wrote: post #2

Absolutely. It’s one of the most cruel and predatory systems that I can imagine — regardless of the severity of your crime, your ability to go home and see your family is determined by your financial status? Christ. Give me a break. It’s also one of those policies that I literally can’t force myself to imagine a “pro” argument for. > Today, three out of five people in U.S. jails have not been convicted of a crime. Th…

...regardless of the severity of your crime, your ability to go home and see your family is determined by your financial status... Are you f'ing kidding me? Regardless of what crime you commit, you should be able to go home and see your family? What ridiculous world are you advocating for here? Do you even think about the implications of your ideas?

Maybe you should try reading the comment again. Nobody is advocating anything.

>It’s one of the most cruel and predatory systems that I can imagine

In fact, parent is voicing the same complaint you are voicing.

>Are you f'ing kidding me? Regardless of what crime you commit, you should be able to go home and see your family?

No, that's not what parent wrote. Parent described the current system and said he think it's crazy. Let me put it in your own words.

"Regardless of what crime you commit, you are not be able to go home and see your family because you don't have enough money" and the inverse "Regardless of what crime you commit, you are always able to go home and see your family if you do have enough money"

The cash bail system lets criminals escape while innocent people are stuck in jail. It's completely nonsensical. Lack of cash is not an indicator of guilt or crime.

> Do you even think about the implications of your ideas?

There are no ideas in the comment. Where do you see them?

Re: Abolish the Cash Bail System

#132

Post by imgabe » Mon, Oct 12, 2020, 8:36 AM UTC

krsdcbl wrote: post #121

bawolff wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pro side: I don't see anything wrong with requiring a surety to ensure that people awaiting trial don't flee, in principle. It makes sure people are less likely to run away while at the same time doesnt force them to sit in jail while they await trial. It should be relative to your ability to pay, and the commercial bondsman industry seems messed up, but those are implementation details and not the core of the system…

I honestly don't really see the pro side. Assuming the accused is guilty and financially well able to pay for bail, this sounds like a pretty good deal to me to just drop some cash, write it off, and be able to leave and never show up for trial. Assuming the accused is innocent and financially unable to pay for bail, they'll end up in jail without ever having committed a crime. Like so much else in the US, it's showi…

It's not like you can forfeit the bail, skip the trial and then just walk away scot-free. There's now a warrant out for your arrest and an additional charge, and you've torpedoed pretty much any chance of leniency.

If it's a serious enough crime, they will come looking for you, and you will not be offered bail a second time. If it wasn't too serious, they might not come looking for you, but you'll have an active warrant so any traffic stop, background check, etc is going to be a huge problem for you. Arguably a worse punishment than whatever you would have gotten if you just showed up at trial.

Maybe if you're planning to never visit that state again or if you're leaving the country entirely and never want to return it might work out, but generally committing additional crimes after you've already been caught for one crime isn't a good idea.

Re: Abolish the Cash Bail System

#133

Post by Broken_Hippo » Mon, Oct 12, 2020, 8:47 AM UTC

bawolff wrote: post #25

ketzo wrote: post #2

Absolutely. It’s one of the most cruel and predatory systems that I can imagine — regardless of the severity of your crime, your ability to go home and see your family is determined by your financial status? Christ. Give me a break. It’s also one of those policies that I literally can’t force myself to imagine a “pro” argument for. > Today, three out of five people in U.S. jails have not been convicted of a crime. Th…

Pro side: I don't see anything wrong with requiring a surety to ensure that people awaiting trial don't flee, in principle. It makes sure people are less likely to run away while at the same time doesnt force them to sit in jail while they await trial. It should be relative to your ability to pay, and the commercial bondsman industry seems messed up, but those are implementation details and not the core of the system…

I don't know. I think it is much better that a few folks don't show up to trial than to criminalize being poor. If I remember correctly, we can reduce folks not showing up by simple measures, like calling to remind folks of trial dates and making sure folks have transportation to get to trial. Why the heck would we put low-and-medium risk folks in jail, to be put in a position to lose their job, house, and freaking children, when we can do these other things that don't criminalize poverty while having less disruption of life?

If folks are found not guilty after spending weeks or months in jail (while being low to medium risk of fleeing), shouldn't we then shoulder the responsibility of fixing the life we've left in shambles? Especially since there was, indeed, other options we could have taken? We don't: At least in Indiana, even if you are found not guilty, you have administrative costs taken out of the bail amount you got back. And that's if you were lucky enough not to be forced to use a bondsman - then you won't get anything back (Yes, folks are court-ordered to use bondsman).

I don't think we should be asking for a surety for low risk at all, and medium risk is iffy - and this is just for felonies. I don't see a good reason to hold anyone for a misdemeanor.

I'm not certain that removing bondsman would make the US system more sane, though it does mean that you aren't charging an actual fee to get out, but instead returning (most of) bail if found not guilty.

Re: Abolish the Cash Bail System

#134

Post by cmurf » Mon, Oct 12, 2020, 8:48 AM UTC

ars wrote: post #28

8f2ab37a-ed6c wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That is fucking crazy. That sounds like a Blade-Runner-esque dystopia. And it’s our reality. From everything I read, it's rather scary to be poor in America, especially if you have to deal with the judicial or medical system.

> or medical system. Poor people get medicaid, which is actually pretty decent insurance since it's private (non government) insurance, paid for by the government. It's actually the middle class that has it hard: Too rich for medicaid, too poor to easily afford the deductibles. (I know this is an unpopular opinion, but things were better before Obamacare - deductibles were much much lower.)

Deductibles have been going up since the invention of HMO's. The idea the rate of increase had increased under PPACA is nonsense. If you want to complain about PPACA, complain about it expanding a greedy for-profit pay per procedure and pillpopping regime that pretends to be a a product. That system should be destroyed. Is immoral and has low efficacy compared to all other industrialized and civilized alternatives, whether public, or hybrid.

Re: Abolish the Cash Bail System

#135

Post by 0xBA5ED » Mon, Oct 12, 2020, 8:57 AM UTC

Broken_Hippo wrote: post #133

bawolff wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pro side: I don't see anything wrong with requiring a surety to ensure that people awaiting trial don't flee, in principle. It makes sure people are less likely to run away while at the same time doesnt force them to sit in jail while they await trial. It should be relative to your ability to pay, and the commercial bondsman industry seems messed up, but those are implementation details and not the core of the system…

I don't know. I think it is much better that a few folks don't show up to trial than to criminalize being poor. If I remember correctly, we can reduce folks not showing up by simple measures, like calling to remind folks of trial dates and making sure folks have transportation to get to trial. Why the heck would we put low-and-medium risk folks in jail, to be put in a position to lose their job, house, and freaking c…

>I think it is much better that a few folks don't show up to trial than to criminalize being poor.

>Why the heck would we put low-and-medium risk folks in jail, to be put in a position to lose their job, house, and freaking children, when we can do these other things that don't criminalize poverty while having less disruption of life?

Keep in mind, it isn't easy to suddenly and accidentally get thrown in jail. If the violation is minor and non-violent, then by the time it gets to that point, the person will have had many chances to straighten up (more often than not) and simply chose to ignore the warnings.

Re: Abolish the Cash Bail System

#136

Post by dragonwriter » Mon, Oct 12, 2020, 9:05 AM UTC

0xBA5ED wrote: post #135

Broken_Hippo wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know. I think it is much better that a few folks don't show up to trial than to criminalize being poor. If I remember correctly, we can reduce folks not showing up by simple measures, like calling to remind folks of trial dates and making sure folks have transportation to get to trial. Why the heck would we put low-and-medium risk folks in jail, to be put in a position to lose their job, house, and freaking c…

>I think it is much better that a few folks don't show up to trial than to criminalize being poor. >Why the heck would we put low-and-medium risk folks in jail, to be put in a position to lose their job, house, and freaking children, when we can do these other things that don't criminalize poverty while having less disruption of life? Keep in mind, it isn't easy to suddenly and accidentally get thrown in jail. If the…

> it isn't easy to suddenly and accidentally get thrown in jail.

No one accidentally gets thrown in jail, its always an intentional act by another person.

And it is very easy to suddenly get thrown in jail, particularly if you are poor and/or non-white.

> If the violation is minor and non-violent, then by the time it gets to that point, the person will have had many chances to straighten up (more often than not) and simply chose to ignore the warnings.

That's...very much not true. It might be true if you are referring to post-conviction incarceration, it is very much not true when talking about pre-trial confinement as a means of ensuring appearance. Plenty of minor and non-violent offenses are arrestable, rather than merely citable, even if the accused has no prior record.

Re: Abolish the Cash Bail System

#137

Post by american_aurora » Mon, Oct 12, 2020, 9:06 AM UTC

ketzo wrote: post #2

Absolutely. It’s one of the most cruel and predatory systems that I can imagine — regardless of the severity of your crime, your ability to go home and see your family is determined by your financial status? Christ. Give me a break. It’s also one of those policies that I literally can’t force myself to imagine a “pro” argument for. > Today, three out of five people in U.S. jails have not been convicted of a crime. Th…

> It’s also one of those policies that I literally can’t force myself to imagine a “pro” argument for.

I have always assumed that the goal was to decrease flight risk for people (from the perspective of the court), thereby allowing larger swaths of people to be released pre-trial.

Re: Abolish the Cash Bail System

#138

Post by mtgx » Mon, Oct 12, 2020, 9:08 AM UTC

0xBA5ED wrote: post #135

Broken_Hippo wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know. I think it is much better that a few folks don't show up to trial than to criminalize being poor. If I remember correctly, we can reduce folks not showing up by simple measures, like calling to remind folks of trial dates and making sure folks have transportation to get to trial. Why the heck would we put low-and-medium risk folks in jail, to be put in a position to lose their job, house, and freaking c…

>I think it is much better that a few folks don't show up to trial than to criminalize being poor. >Why the heck would we put low-and-medium risk folks in jail, to be put in a position to lose their job, house, and freaking children, when we can do these other things that don't criminalize poverty while having less disruption of life? Keep in mind, it isn't easy to suddenly and accidentally get thrown in jail. If the…

> Keep in mind, it isn't easy to suddenly and accidentally get thrown in jail.

Have you not paid attention to any protest in the US whatsoever in the past 10-15 years? It's VERY easy to get thrown in jail, even when judges have ruled mere months before that it's illegal for police to keep arresting protesters.

Re: Abolish the Cash Bail System

#139

Post by throwaway17_17 » Mon, Oct 12, 2020, 9:09 AM UTC

0xBA5ED wrote: post #135

Broken_Hippo wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know. I think it is much better that a few folks don't show up to trial than to criminalize being poor. If I remember correctly, we can reduce folks not showing up by simple measures, like calling to remind folks of trial dates and making sure folks have transportation to get to trial. Why the heck would we put low-and-medium risk folks in jail, to be put in a position to lose their job, house, and freaking c…

>I think it is much better that a few folks don't show up to trial than to criminalize being poor. >Why the heck would we put low-and-medium risk folks in jail, to be put in a position to lose their job, house, and freaking children, when we can do these other things that don't criminalize poverty while having less disruption of life? Keep in mind, it isn't easy to suddenly and accidentally get thrown in jail. If the…

This is clearly not a universal truth in the US justice system. It can be very, very simple to be suddenly and through no criminal fault of a defendant’s own that they end up in jail. [1]

1 - source is myself, my clients, and my jurisdiction’s arrest statistics, along with many,many media reports hat prove your point not true.

Re: Abolish the Cash Bail System

#140

Post by VBprogrammer » Mon, Oct 12, 2020, 9:12 AM UTC

samatman wrote: post #123

krsdcbl wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I honestly don't really see the pro side. Assuming the accused is guilty and financially well able to pay for bail, this sounds like a pretty good deal to me to just drop some cash, write it off, and be able to leave and never show up for trial. Assuming the accused is innocent and financially unable to pay for bail, they'll end up in jail without ever having committed a crime. Like so much else in the US, it's showi…

> Assuming the accused is guilty and financially well able to pay for bail, this sounds like a pretty good deal to me to just drop some cash, write it off, and be able to leave and never show up for trial. I don't support cash bail, personally, but it's worth noting that some amount of the bail money can be converted to a bounty for the apprehension of those of the accused who go on to skip trial.

From a non-US person, the whole Bounty system, now that is where things truly hit the Blade-Runner-esque dystopia level.