Welcome to Lawless Illinois

a reply to: FishsticksAndKetchup

With my logic, anyone with half a brain understands that even from 2019-2020 there was a almost 25% increase in crime, only to go up exponentially in the last couple of years.

a reply to: datguy

Bail is not a debt. Bail bonds on the other hand, are.

One does not HAVE to pay bail, it is an option if you don't want to be in jail while awaiting trial and not something you have to pay if you are in custody until your court date. There is also always the option of a bail bond, which in that case would be a debt that you owe to the bondsman. But, bail in itself is not a debt.

a reply to: PorkChop96

yes this is true, but does not address the few cases where an individual would need or even want a bond.

Lets say you are accused of a serious crime, in which you know you are innocent. would you sit in jail and wait to defend yourself or attempt to secure a bond, even if you could not afford the payments?

In some cases wouldn't the lack of bail requirements be reasonable?

In addition, if an individual is given a very small bail for, lets say...stealing food from a grocery store. Is this really someone who is a danger to others that needs to be subject prison?

a reply to: datguy

The whole premise of a bail bondsman is to work with the person needing bail to make things affordable for them. Rarely, in the instances I have seen from guys I know that work in that industry, have they denied someone a bond because the payments were going to take too long. Just saying

I never said it was a perfect system

a reply to: PorkChop96

I did not mean to insinuate that you did, I was merely curious if there were any instances where you might think that a lack of a bail program would/could be beneficial to society or to the justice system

a reply to: datguy

In most cases, yes, a no bail system SHOULD be fine for small things like petty theft, j walking, and other misdemeanor acts. It is, more often than not, those that commit major acts such as assault, homicide, armed robbery, burglary, etc, that are the main issue with being set free for little to no bail and then they do the same thing before they even get their day in court.

I wish I would have saved the links, the are in threads that are now gone due to the pit being dissolved, but I had a plethora of cases where criminals that were out on reduced/no bail, due to "not wanting racial bias", and they commit more crimes.

One in particular was a young women that was robbed, beaten, and left paralyzed by a punk who was let out on (somewhere around) $100 bail due to his family "not having the money" to make his original bail for a gun charge.

Is this what people want to see more of?

a reply to: PorkChop96

i certainly dont but cant speak for others.

But this bill doesnt just let everyone walk free. It is to be determined on a case by case basis which violators are to be free and which will await in jail. In some instances (with a reasonable judge) , hopefully violent offenders will not be able to be released, this would be a net positive for society and possibly a more efficient deterrent, IMO

As i stated earlier, i hope you keep up with these events and provide updates to the thread as they arise

Hey, I already created a thread on this subject, but now I notice it's been removed. Why was it removed, and does that mean this thread will be removed as well?

The thread I created was called:
"Illinois SAFE-T Act Put On Hold By State Supreme Court."

originally posted by: datguy
a reply to: PorkChop96

i certainly dont but cant speak for others.

But this bill doesnt just let everyone walk free. It is to be determined on a case by case basis which violators are to be free and which will await in jail. In some instances (with a reasonable judge) , hopefully violent offenders will not be able to be released, this would be a net positive for society and possibly a more efficient deterrent, IMO

As i stated earlier, i hope you keep up with these events and provide updates to the thread as they arise

and until everyone understands who makes the call and how the call is made, it's pointless to argue about it. We can go off of the results we have seen, crime is a big problem in areas where punishment is minimal to non existent. And no I won't link to anything, I live in the country, and we don't have those issues here.

a reply to: TrulyColorBlind

Looks like your was in the pit and the pit is no more. All things posted there were epsteined.

originally posted by: PorkChop96
Looks like your was in the pit and the pit is no more. All things posted there were epsteined.

When you say they were "Epsteined," do you mean they were secrectly transferred to another location to hide out or that they're permanently dead and gone?

Whatever it was that happened, it was a pretty dirty trick to remove helpful and fact-filled posts like that. I think that's all I have to say.



TCB

a reply to: network dude

you bring up a good point.

The bill is something like 370+ pages and affects/amends a pretty large list of established laws, of which I have not and do not plan to read.

Is it the judge who gets to decide which crimes are worth detention? as it is assumed they can only judge based on established law, not based on personal opinion. I wonder if there will some proverbial line in the sand which dictates which criminals are to be released until trial and which will be detained.

Im curious to see if any further lawsuits or attempts to stop this bill will arise

I don't understand how this is racist?
Are there no rich black people and no poor white folks?
That's a pretty naive view of the world.

Plus, yes rich criminals can afford to not sit in jail but it's a perk for being able to afford an offer. This is the case for everything.

Poor people can't afford private schools, decent lawyers, designer clothes, expensive holidays, proper healthcare etc etc.

It's what it is. Being poor can suck, but that comes from lack of money for extravagance.
If you want to be rich, get an education, become an entrepreneur or just enjoy having rich parents.

There are also things rich people can't do but poor people can.
I know that my friends are there because they like me and not my money.
You have to work hard if you own your own company. I don't. I can't work any longer, used to and nearly died, but the good thing is that everyday is a cheap holiday.
When you are poor you don't need your home to be a fortress when you are away.

Being older now I would not choose to be suddenly rich.
It brings it's own problems, which I just couldn't hack anymore.

I'm rich in mind, because I have time. I'm no longer constantly stressed.

It's not racist at all. It may be wealthyist, but there are plenty of very rich black people.
Do they somehow not count, so that the oppression myth can be upheld?

originally posted by: quintessentone

I've witnessed many bail hearings from my past employment and the judges know what they are doing, believe me.

Until I got feed up with the corruption and incompetence in the courts/legal system I was the court referral officer in charge of House Arrest & Work Release program in a large county. In that position I was in court a lot and not as an observer and I don't think you know what you are talking about at all in this matter.

This is problematic for pretty much all the reasons sane folk are itemizing here.

My very first thought was the same as network dude in that the "caveat" is a pacifier that won't work and it really doesn't take much thought to see that it's at the very least problematic, right?

You can believe me when I tell you that I agree we have problems in our court systems and many abuses of power...but "no cash" bail isn't any real solution.

a reply to: Hecate666

It's not

The court systems are trying to push this bull snip through in an effort to further the stigma that everything in the US is inherently racist. All for the votes and the money

I'll add an obvious component here that hasn't been mentioned so far and that's law enforcement morale.

With policies like this, cops will quit and go to other less idiotic jurisdictions. It's already happening across multiple agencies. The ones that stay create a different set of potential problems such as being or becoming indifferent, less proactive and involved and frankly are just there to collect the incentives for joining a lost cause.

This TOO will exacerbate an already doomed situation into further ruin.

Those circling the wagons around these insidiously asinine ideas really are retarded.

Literally, by every measure and indice, you folks need helmets and a short bus.

But by all means carry on morons.

a reply to: DBCowboy

I own some in Central Illinois too. It would be hilarious if we were neighbors and didn't know we were both on ATS.... if we were dumb enough to move there.

I don't think either of us is.

These libtard losers are like locusts, they destroy a place with their stupid ideologies than blame others as they move on to destroy another conservative place, wish we could contain them inside the craphole they helped create.

a reply to: ATSAlex

"Craphole(s)", plural. FIFY.

yoloda.org...

70% of Those Released on $0 Bail Commit New Crimes

In June of this year, in an effort to provide some transparency on the $0 bail policies and associated data, and to better inform ongoing legislative discussions on the issue, the Yolo County District Attorney’s office conducted an analysis of $0 bail and rearrests. Recent criminal histories of the 595 individuals released on $0 bail in Yolo County were reviewed for any new arrests in the state of California. Of the 595 individuals released, 420 were rearrested (70.6%) and 123 (20% of the overall number or 29% of those rearrested) were arrested for a crime of violence. The crimes of violence included murder, attempted murder, kidnapping, robbery, carjacking, and domestic violence.