31–40 of 123 posts
Putting someone in jail for breaking the law isn't about costs. Besides before you know it nobody pays for their ticket and then what? This is a nice deterrent for any other sad sack who thinks he is above the rules.
No one is arguing there should be no deterrent at all. The argument is that the current punishment is too high and is well beyond being a reasonable deterrent.
Can someone explain it to me, why in SF its treated as a minor ticket similar to overdue parking meters as apposed to NYC where people are jailed for not having a valid ticket ? Never thought NYC could be soo ridiculous.
We should just make the subway free. $2.75 doesn't come close to covering the cost of the ride, so why add a regressive tax on what amounts to a basic need?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This line of thinking has two serious problem: it assumes that people 1) Actually intentionally break the law as a choice and 2) Actually think about the consequences of their actions And to a lesser extent, this ignores the subset of circumstances where people forget to pay, actually do pay but the payment gets lost, or can't afford to pay but need to get places. This is why 3-strike rules are abject failures (life…
Neither of those points is an excuse for breaking the law unless you're mentally ill. In which case you should still be locked up but this time in a mental institution. Just pay for your ticket or walk.
I don't know enough to take a position on this issue one way or another, but I think it should be pointed out that expensive jail time for a few people could serve as a deterrent that results in enough increased fare revenue to offset the cost.
This line of thinking has two serious problem: it assumes that people 1) Actually intentionally break the law as a choice and 2) Actually think about the consequences of their actions And to a lesser extent, this ignores the subset of circumstances where people forget to pay, actually do pay but the payment gets lost, or can't afford to pay but need to get places. This is why 3-strike rules are abject failures (life…
Is it worth it to prosecute petty thefts for less than $100? If not, then we are giving the green light to that kind of crime. What incentive would you have to run a small business selling things if the state won't enforce the law?
> This line of thinking has two serious problem: it assumes that people 1) Actually intentionally break the law as a choice and 2) Actually think about the consequences of their actions
I lived in New York City, and saw the people who tried that in Bushwick. I actually agree that there are sadly many adults who completely dysfunctional. But that does not mean that we should just abandon our laws. Is it not a much bigger problem that we have people who simply can not help but break the law?
Seems like a good idea to accompany the jail stay with a $22K bill for the costs. Don't want to pay the fine? Pay the goddamn fare.
"I could demonstrate to you that every single bank robbery, that in every single case practically, the cost of the police was more than the actual money that the robbers took from the bank. Does that mean, 'Oh, you see, there's really no economic interest involved, then. They're not protecting the banks. The police are just doing this because they're on a power trip, or they're macho, or they're control freaks, that'…
I don't see that as a leftist quote. The police aren't supposed to be a profit center.
"I could demonstrate to you that every single bank robbery, that in every single case practically, the cost of the police was more than the actual money that the robbers took from the bank. Does that mean, 'Oh, you see, there's really no economic interest involved, then. They're not protecting the banks. The police are just doing this because they're on a power trip, or they're macho, or they're control freaks, that'…
But it didn't cost $22,000. If he didn't go to a jail would the city save $22k? The city lost $215,000,000 in revenue due to the fare evasion.
In 2014, I was working for a startup when I found out the founder had embezzled/stolen our investor money, lied to creditors, stolen employee salaries and W2 tax contributions, etc. and used the money to fund his big apartment, private schools for his children, two full-time nannies, and a nice BMW. After we found out we all resigned and the following Monday were sitting in the DA's office (financial crimes). The DA decided to pick up the case (fortunately, mostly because it was an absolute slam dunk after he confessed to it all through email) and it took them literally 3 years of interviews, research, etc to take the case to grand jury. Eventually, he plead guilty and has to pay back roughly 650K to employees + investors, but NYC must have spent well over 1MM to get that money back to us.
The only person that actually paid a lawyer in this case was the person who plead guilty, and of course, the tax payers of NYC