- 5,377
- 4,431
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2013
I'm sure I've been to more places than you have in life to determine their nationality ...
NYC to get a whole lot more interesting 2020 VOL. eliminating cash bail
- 37,739
- 51,924
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2014
Yet you still can’t tell if someone is an illegal immigrant by looking at them
So that leads to only one conclusion that you are a racist
and get off your high horse...did you serve? Is that why? Well me too I been all around the world as well. It actually has nothing to do with what you said anyways.
- 43,087
- 27,961
- Joined
- Dec 25, 2003
- 36,573
- 48,786
- Joined
- May 12, 2008
Stop it 5.
Yall Florida cats ain't do nothing about George Zimmerman.
- 27,241
- 39,348
- Joined
- Mar 14, 2010
ya’ll ain’t touch Al Qaeda nem’.... ALPO, Sammy the Bull.... so on and so forth
llerraj
Banned
- 5,441
- 6,974
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2016
Everyone who wants Alpo dead is dead themselves, in jail or broke.
Sammy the Bull never came back to the city.
Back to the OT, it's about to get real when the ball drops. The woman who beat up three Hasidics and the guy who sucker punched a cop were both let out with no bail. These politicians with no skin in the game are about to see the impact of their decisions.
- 22,905
- 26,767
- Joined
- Mar 21, 2010
The people who employee the low level drug peddlers are usually making bail anyway.... this law still keeps violent criminals & rapist in jail. I don't see the issue at all.
you know how many kids get a drug charge, can't make bail and are sitting in Rikers for a year or two waiting to go to trial. Jail time completely changes these kids.
- 2,731
- 2,256
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2012
Exactly, this is great news.
- 2,731
- 2,256
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2012
What does that have to do with removing bail for non violent offenses? You'd prefer a person with money to afford bail being able to commit the same crime and walk out?
- 34,898
- 76,785
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2014
@ "I've traveled more than you so I can gauge someone's residency better"Wut.
Top Boy
formerly jay patt
- 8,405
- 5,622
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2013
The east coast has been trash for a minute, this is just reinforcing that
NY about to be the next FL
NY about to be the next FL
llerraj
Banned
- 5,441
- 6,974
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2016
If you commit a crime, you sit and think about it. Regardless of what you did. Theft is a non violent offense. Vandalism is a non violent offense. Arson is a non violent offense.
llerraj
Banned
- 5,441
- 6,974
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2016
They shouldn't have sold dope. **** them. These kids would rather credit card scam and steal than get a job.
- 37,739
- 51,924
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2014
cats are really out here trying to validate their racism
Wut.
- 34,898
- 76,785
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2014
- 27,241
- 39,348
- Joined
- Mar 14, 2010
Or hustle and go legit. Cats be hitting licks and WILDING, trying to be scene. If I hit a lick, you might not see me until I look like Forrest Gump after his marathon
- 22,905
- 26,767
- Joined
- Mar 21, 2010
IDK if this is a troll or not, if it isn't there really ain't **** to discuss. your simply not qualified to have this conversation.
Not to mention many people are sitting in jail for years for crimes they ultimately didn't commit, but because the city can't manage to get their **** together they just gave two years of their life to ultimately get found innocent once sent to trial.
- 25,223
- 44,833
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2010
When OP makes threads like this yo just pushing conservative talking points and scare tactics that they use, so be mindful of that before any real thought is put into a discussion... "Bout to be like the early 90's" 
- 2,731
- 2,256
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2012
1 - you have to be proven guilty
2- What does that have to do with bail? You're saying you're ok with a person with money not having to sit, but a poor person has to sit. You make no sense.
- 2,731
- 2,256
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2012
Yeah this is all a joke, dudes aren't even arguing the bail system which is the fact that as long as you can afford it (guilty or not) you don't have to sit in jail while awaiting a trial(which is almost always an option unless it's a violent offense).When OP makes threads like this yo just pushing conservative talking points and scare tactics that they use, so be mindful of that before any real thought is put into a discussion... "Bout to be like the early 90's"
This is about money.
llerraj
Banned
- 5,441
- 6,974
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2016
I'm making plenty of sense. You're bleeding liberal act gets no respect from me.
llerraj
Banned
- 5,441
- 6,974
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2016
Are you qualified? Who's many? You're telling me that Rikers is packed to the brim with people who are all claiming innocence? ***** please.
- 2,731
- 2,256
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2012
cs02132
Supporter
- 12,669
- 12,940
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2007
Long overdue!!!
I have no idea what some of you are talking about.
If the person is a threat to the public then NO BAIL.
If the person is not a threat to the public then why should they sit in jail or be forced into debt?
History:
The second wave of bail reform came from 1960 to 1980 and focused on detention rather than release. In 1984, Congress passed the federal enabling preventative detention based on public safety concerns in addition to concerns that the person would fail to appear at trial. States began passing and enacting similar measures that allowed for pretrial detention based on safety and appearance risk. The Bail Reform Act of 1984 was upheld on appeal to the Supreme Court in United States v. Salerno because of carefully structured procedural requirements within the act that strictly defined when a person could be deemed too risky to be released. Specifically, the act required a hearing on a motion to detain, and gave the defendant a right to counsel at the hearing, a right to call and cross-examine witnesses, and a right to appeal the decision of the court if it ruled in favor of detainment.
Although federal and many state legislatures crafted constitutional procedural rules that would ensure that only the most risky defendants were detained—including safeguards that would guarantee that courts follow the procedures for denying a person bail—most state courts ignored them. Instead, what typically happens in Ohio and other states is that a judge will set a high money bond with the purpose of detaining an individual until the conclusion of the trial. In Ohio, most money bonds are set without any appreciation for the defendant’s ability to pay and are based in large part on the level of offense charged. Setting a bond that is too high, with the purpose of detaining a defendant, is unlawful. It violates the defendant’s due process rights by circumventing the hearing process, the right to counsel, the right to call and confront witnesses, and the right to appeal the court’s decision. Essentially, the individual is being unconstitutionally held.
Because of the unconstitutional setting of money bonds, and the inherent economic and racial inequities that come with setting financial conditions to pretrial release, America has embarked on a third-generation of bail reform. Across the country several states have reformed their constitutions and statutes. It’s crucial that courts prioritize release by turning away from secured money bonds and instead use the least restrictive means necessary to ensure public safety and appearance. In the words of Timothy R. Schnacke, a leading researcher and author on pretrial practice in Fundamentals of Bail, “[p]retrial justice in America requires a complete cultural change from one in which we primarily associate bail with money to one in which we do not.”
www.acluohio.org
]
I have no idea what some of you are talking about.
If the person is a threat to the public then NO BAIL.
If the person is not a threat to the public then why should they sit in jail or be forced into debt?
History:
The second wave of bail reform came from 1960 to 1980 and focused on detention rather than release. In 1984, Congress passed the federal enabling preventative detention based on public safety concerns in addition to concerns that the person would fail to appear at trial. States began passing and enacting similar measures that allowed for pretrial detention based on safety and appearance risk. The Bail Reform Act of 1984 was upheld on appeal to the Supreme Court in United States v. Salerno because of carefully structured procedural requirements within the act that strictly defined when a person could be deemed too risky to be released. Specifically, the act required a hearing on a motion to detain, and gave the defendant a right to counsel at the hearing, a right to call and cross-examine witnesses, and a right to appeal the decision of the court if it ruled in favor of detainment.
Although federal and many state legislatures crafted constitutional procedural rules that would ensure that only the most risky defendants were detained—including safeguards that would guarantee that courts follow the procedures for denying a person bail—most state courts ignored them. Instead, what typically happens in Ohio and other states is that a judge will set a high money bond with the purpose of detaining an individual until the conclusion of the trial. In Ohio, most money bonds are set without any appreciation for the defendant’s ability to pay and are based in large part on the level of offense charged. Setting a bond that is too high, with the purpose of detaining a defendant, is unlawful. It violates the defendant’s due process rights by circumventing the hearing process, the right to counsel, the right to call and confront witnesses, and the right to appeal the court’s decision. Essentially, the individual is being unconstitutionally held.
Because of the unconstitutional setting of money bonds, and the inherent economic and racial inequities that come with setting financial conditions to pretrial release, America has embarked on a third-generation of bail reform. Across the country several states have reformed their constitutions and statutes. It’s crucial that courts prioritize release by turning away from secured money bonds and instead use the least restrictive means necessary to ensure public safety and appearance. In the words of Timothy R. Schnacke, a leading researcher and author on pretrial practice in Fundamentals of Bail, “[p]retrial justice in America requires a complete cultural change from one in which we primarily associate bail with money to one in which we do not.”
A Brief History of Cash Bail
When you think of the term "bail" do you tend to visualize bond agents, bounty hunters, and flashing neon signs with names like ABC Bonds, A-1 Bonds, EZ Bonds? That’s what we thought. The reason you likely think this way is because that's what you've been taught to think by what you've seen or...
www.acluohio.org
Last edited:
