6 ms·

The main item in certain states is not prosecuting crime. We recently had a smash and grab robbery that made news here in SoCal. The suspects were quickly appre

by vondur 5y ago

The main item in certain states is not prosecuting crime. We recently had a smash and grab robbery that made news here in SoCal. The suspects were quickly apprehended, but it turns out they were released on bail almost immediately afterwards. Due to the non-prosecution of criminal acts, these people will probably never do any jail time. People are definitely cognizant of this at this point, and it's eroding peoples trust of the government.

whimsicalism 5y ago
Seems reasonable to have bail for a smash-and-grab rather than jail. I'd vote against someone proposing otherwise, as do most people I know, so I'm guessing this is just a reflection of the general democratic will of the citizenry here.
- alphabettsy 5y ago
  Interesting because I’m all for bail reform and alternative punishment for petty crime, but a smash-and-grab seems awfully brazen. Bail seems appropriate for someone stealing an unattended bike, less so for other crimes.
  - whimsicalism 5y ago
    what sort of petty crimes, that previously had mandatory jail time, are you even thinking of? to me, cutting a bike lock and smash & grabbing are like definitional petty crimes.
    - alphabettsy 5y ago
      Stealing a cellphone can still be a felony based on the amounts we’re talking about. For me there’s a distinction between entering a locked building and stealing a bike locked on the sidewalk. It’s arbitrary I know.
      - whimsicalism 5y ago
        Building? I was discussing cars.
heavyset_go 5y ago
> The suspects were quickly apprehended, but it turns out they were released on bail almost immediately afterwards. Bail is given when someone hasn't had a court determine their guilt yet. Getting rid of bail means that innocent people will sit in jail until their trials.
throwawaygh 5y ago
Releasing on bail isn't the same as non-prosecution. Tons of people who are released on bail are later convicted and sentenced to lengthy prison terms.
bmm6o 5y ago
Are you sure they won't be prosecuted? The point of requiring bail is to make sure they show up for court appearances, isn't it?
Fervicus 5y ago
Related to OPs point, Proposition 47 in California reclassified certain thefts under $950 to a misdemeanor instead of a felony. There is evidence that this has resulted in increases in such crimes.
- alphabettsy 5y ago
  I don’t believe this argument. The dollar amount was $400 previously. Most shoplifting was already under $400 and I’m being asked to believe, from unreliable sources, that changing it to $950 alone changed things? Misdemeanors still carry punishment and possible jail time. What’s missing?
  - MisterBastahrd 5y ago
    People with a burning desire to believe that anything that isn't overly punitive is a sign of weakness and moral decay. The sociopaths aren't the ones looking at ridiculous punishments for minor offenses and trying to get them reduced. They're the ones who are held back from committing obvious crimes by criminal penalties, instead of just not being an asshole. A felony for $950 in stolen goods? You're not gonna get that conviction without a court, which means that everyone involved in that chain, from the judge, to the lawyers, to the compensation of the jury, to the bailiff, to the entire police apparatus involved in apprehending and charging them, and so on, is gonna need to be compensated for handling the issue. And that's before any time is served. If you aren't going to try to root out the true cause of why people are stealing, you might as well just throw a ton of money in a giant pit and have a cookout.
  - Fervicus 5y ago
    California Property Crime Surge Is Unintended Consequence of Proposition 47: https://www.independent.org/publications/article.asp?id=9417 https://www.independent.org/publications/article.asp?id=9417
    - alphabettsy 5y ago
      It’s a pretty good read and still nothing definitive. When the property crime goes back up to where it was two years before I’m having a hard time seeing anything conclusive. How do I know that police choosing not to pursue or investigate minor property crime after the passage of Prop 47 is not the cause? Maybe it’s part of a greater social and economic shift in the region? Are no other factors to be considered and ruled out? Given the considerable cost of criminalization and incarceration it’s amazing to me that it seems to be the only solution being offered. The author does provide a more holistic solution, but I can’t say I’m anymore convinced about the roughly $500 change making a big difference.

by vondur 5y ago

whimsicalism 5y ago

Seems reasonable to have bail for a smash-and-grab rather than jail. I'd vote against someone proposing otherwise, as do most people I know, so I'm guessing this is just a reflection of the general democratic will of the citizenry here.

alphabettsy 5y ago
Interesting because I’m all for bail reform and alternative punishment for petty crime, but a smash-and-grab seems awfully brazen. Bail seems appropriate for someone stealing an unattended bike, less so for other crimes.
- whimsicalism 5y ago
  what sort of petty crimes, that previously had mandatory jail time, are you even thinking of? to me, cutting a bike lock and smash & grabbing are like definitional petty crimes.
  - alphabettsy 5y ago
    Stealing a cellphone can still be a felony based on the amounts we’re talking about. For me there’s a distinction between entering a locked building and stealing a bike locked on the sidewalk. It’s arbitrary I know.
    - whimsicalism 5y ago
      Building? I was discussing cars.

heavyset_go 5y ago

> The suspects were quickly apprehended, but it turns out they were released on bail almost immediately afterwards. Bail is given when someone hasn't had a court determine their guilt yet. Getting rid of bail means that innocent people will sit in jail until their trials.

throwawaygh 5y ago

Releasing on bail isn't the same as non-prosecution. Tons of people who are released on bail are later convicted and sentenced to lengthy prison terms.

bmm6o 5y ago

Are you sure they won't be prosecuted? The point of requiring bail is to make sure they show up for court appearances, isn't it?

Fervicus 5y ago

Related to OPs point, Proposition 47 in California reclassified certain thefts under $950 to a misdemeanor instead of a felony. There is evidence that this has resulted in increases in such crimes.

alphabettsy 5y ago
I don’t believe this argument. The dollar amount was $400 previously. Most shoplifting was already under $400 and I’m being asked to believe, from unreliable sources, that changing it to $950 alone changed things? Misdemeanors still carry punishment and possible jail time. What’s missing?
- MisterBastahrd 5y ago
  People with a burning desire to believe that anything that isn't overly punitive is a sign of weakness and moral decay. The sociopaths aren't the ones looking at ridiculous punishments for minor offenses and trying to get them reduced. They're the ones who are held back from committing obvious crimes by criminal penalties, instead of just not being an asshole. A felony for $950 in stolen goods? You're not gonna get that conviction without a court, which means that everyone involved in that chain, from the judge, to the lawyers, to the compensation of the jury, to the bailiff, to the entire police apparatus involved in apprehending and charging them, and so on, is gonna need to be compensated for handling the issue. And that's before any time is served. If you aren't going to try to root out the true cause of why people are stealing, you might as well just throw a ton of money in a giant pit and have a cookout.
- Fervicus 5y ago
  California Property Crime Surge Is Unintended Consequence of Proposition 47: https://www.independent.org/publications/article.asp?id=9417 https://www.independent.org/publications/article.asp?id=9417
  - alphabettsy 5y ago
    It’s a pretty good read and still nothing definitive. When the property crime goes back up to where it was two years before I’m having a hard time seeing anything conclusive. How do I know that police choosing not to pursue or investigate minor property crime after the passage of Prop 47 is not the cause? Maybe it’s part of a greater social and economic shift in the region? Are no other factors to be considered and ruled out? Given the considerable cost of criminalization and incarceration it’s amazing to me that it seems to be the only solution being offered. The author does provide a more holistic solution, but I can’t say I’m anymore convinced about the roughly $500 change making a big difference.