waitforufo Posted June 8, 2016 Share Posted June 8, 2016 And yet, despite what you are saying should happen, that is not what we are seeing actually happen in practice. Simply having a job does not mean that you have cash to spare. We are talking mostly about people who are living paycheck to paycheck. Being able to pay your bills is not the same thing as having a $1,000 on hand to post bail. Nor does having friends or family mean that you know anyone else who has money they can put up for you. That's the problem. It is an actual problem. Assuming that it doesn't happen and therefore there is no problem does not solve anything. I appreciate the problem and understand that it is real. Believe me when I say I have little trust in government, in particular the police or prosecutors. I have also suggested an alternative. Perhaps you can suggest an alternative. If I have missed it I apologize. No system is perfect. The bail system we have today works for many. My guess would be that it works for most. Prosecutors don't or at least shouldn't be holding people unless they have sufficient evidence to convict. Hence your right to a speedy trail. The government isn't supposed to arrest and jail people and then go on a fishing expedition to find evidence to convict. But if prosecutors do believe they have the evidence to convict, then the suspect must be controlled to ensure they go to trial. That is currently done through bail or jail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted June 9, 2016 Share Posted June 9, 2016 If they have a job or relatives then they should be able to come up with the money for a bail bond. It means they are connected to a community that can help provide that money and also assure they make there court date to get their money back. That is the purpose of bail. So in your view of the world people have money. Nobody is living paycheck-to-paycheck, scrambling to make ends meet. Relatives (which would include kids, or a sibling who had been laid off and can't find work because unemployment for their slice of Americana is high, etc.) have money, too. It's never a decision of eating or paying for medication or things like that. The real world is different from that. Why is it frightening to you? Having a threat of harm may be frighting at the moment, but that moment passes. Having your car stolen causes you real damage. My statement is only logical. Today the color of the sky in my world is blue. Sometimes it's gray and black at night. It is always curious to me why some think property crimes are somehow less damaging to people that violent crimes. Why is that? If someone ruins you financially through crime, you can be greatly damaged. Do you recognize that? That sound like the view of someone who values property above life and health, and that kind of attitude quite frankly explains a lot of the GOP. While changing your mind on this would be folly, the least I can do is point out that not everybody shares it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharonY Posted June 10, 2016 Share Posted June 10, 2016 That sound like the view of someone who values property above life and health, and that kind of attitude quite frankly explains a lot of the GOP. While changing your mind on this would be folly, the least I can do is point out that not everybody shares it. Even then it does not make a lot of sense. Serious injuries are costly, either prohibitively so if not or under-insured or it may cost you your job (especially for non-specialist jobs) or revenue (e.g. if self-employed). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ten oz Posted June 10, 2016 Share Posted June 10, 2016 locking people up should only be for those who are a danger. If someone being free to walk the street poses a tangible threat. Everyone else can be dealt with through fines in my opinion. The idea of bail and bond is pointless in 2016. If a court fines someone in Kansas it isn't like that person can just get on a horse ride off to Oklahoma and start over. Once a fines is in place wages can be garnished, it can be taken from tax returns, and etc. A person will have credit, banking, and etc trouble until it is resolved so they aren't able to just walk away from it. So the idea of a having a collateral system in place to ensure a person shows up for a court date isn't neccessary. Don't show up and the court rules agaionst you automatically. Show up and you can defend yourself. It is simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now