Good news for drunk drivers in NY!

Other discussions not related to the Permanent Portfolio

Moderator: Global Moderator

Post Reply
Libertarian666
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 5994
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 6:00 pm

Good news for drunk drivers in NY!

Post by Libertarian666 » Sat Jan 04, 2020 7:10 am

WiseOne
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 2692
Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2022 11:08 am

Re: Good news for drunk drivers in NY!

Post by WiseOne » Sat Jan 04, 2020 9:21 am

Geez tech, thanks for spoiling my breakfast - again!

Wonder what our dear mayor has to say about this. So now it's not just about the bail, it's about the fact that prosecutors have to delay charging people because of the 15 day rule.

Also I'm not sure the crazy Democrats who put this in place really understood what bail is all about. It's not about the money. It's about keeping people safe from criminals. If someone can't post bail, then they are locked up. Score one for safe. If someone does post bail, they have a big incentive not to misbehave. Only having a large amount of money at risk can really ensure that. If that's considered unfair then I have another solution: instead of bail, THEY ALL GET LOCKED UP. Period. I'd be fine with electronic monitoring for some nonviolent offenses (e.g. white collar crime, selling stuff illegally on the sidewalk, being caught with fireworks on July 4 etc) but the mayor's definition of "nonviolent" truly boggles the mind. Like, say, in this case.
Libertarian666
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 5994
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 6:00 pm

Re: Good news for drunk drivers in NY!

Post by Libertarian666 » Sat Jan 04, 2020 11:18 am

WiseOne wrote:
Sat Jan 04, 2020 9:21 am
Geez tech, thanks for spoiling my breakfast - again!
Don't shoot the messenger. I'm just trying to help you make up your mind to leave.
WiseOne wrote:
Sat Jan 04, 2020 9:21 am
Wonder what our dear mayor has to say about this. So now it's not just about the bail, it's about the fact that prosecutors have to delay charging people because of the 15 day rule.

Also I'm not sure the crazy Democrats who put this in place really understood what bail is all about. It's not about the money. It's about keeping people safe from criminals. If someone can't post bail, then they are locked up. Score one for safe. If someone does post bail, they have a big incentive not to misbehave. Only having a large amount of money at risk can really ensure that. If that's considered unfair then I have another solution: instead of bail, THEY ALL GET LOCKED UP. Period. I'd be fine with electronic monitoring for some nonviolent offenses (e.g. white collar crime, selling stuff illegally on the sidewalk, being caught with fireworks on July 4 etc) but the mayor's definition of "nonviolent" truly boggles the mind. Like, say, in this case.
I'm sure de Blasio is fine with it because he doesn't want people to be safe from criminals. As with the rest of the far left, which wants as much crime as possible so they can frighten the population into going along with their crazy schemes. NY is just going to get worse until some breaking point is reached.

Unless things change dramatically for the better, I'm never setting foot in NYC again. And I used to live in Queens and then in Nassau County.
WiseOne
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 2692
Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2022 11:08 am

Re: Good news for drunk drivers in NY!

Post by WiseOne » Sun Jan 05, 2020 10:19 am

Libertarian666 wrote:
Sat Jan 04, 2020 11:18 am
WiseOne wrote:
Sat Jan 04, 2020 9:21 am
Geez tech, thanks for spoiling my breakfast - again!
Don't shoot the messenger. I'm just trying to help you make up your mind to leave.
Appreciated!!!

Going to be watching this carefully. If the politburo in charge of this city continues along its current path, it will certainly force the issue. Especially if real estate prices start being impacted.
Libertarian666
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 5994
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 6:00 pm

Re: Good news for drunk drivers in NY!

Post by Libertarian666 » Sun Jan 05, 2020 11:06 am

WiseOne wrote:
Sun Jan 05, 2020 10:19 am
Libertarian666 wrote:
Sat Jan 04, 2020 11:18 am
WiseOne wrote:
Sat Jan 04, 2020 9:21 am
Geez tech, thanks for spoiling my breakfast - again!
Don't shoot the messenger. I'm just trying to help you make up your mind to leave.
Appreciated!!!

Going to be watching this carefully. If the politburo in charge of this city continues along its current path, it will certainly force the issue. Especially if real estate prices start being impacted.
I can't imagine that they won't be impacted. You won't be the only one to figure out that it's too dangerous to live there.
Are you ready to retire? Or would you get a license in the state you move to?
User avatar
Mountaineer
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4959
Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2012 10:54 am

Re: Good news for drunk drivers in NY!

Post by Mountaineer » Sun Jan 05, 2020 1:57 pm

Libertarian666 wrote:
Sun Jan 05, 2020 11:06 am
WiseOne wrote:
Sun Jan 05, 2020 10:19 am
Libertarian666 wrote:
Sat Jan 04, 2020 11:18 am
WiseOne wrote:
Sat Jan 04, 2020 9:21 am
Geez tech, thanks for spoiling my breakfast - again!
Don't shoot the messenger. I'm just trying to help you make up your mind to leave.
Appreciated!!!

Going to be watching this carefully. If the politburo in charge of this city continues along its current path, it will certainly force the issue. Especially if real estate prices start being impacted.
I can't imagine that they won't be impacted. You won't be the only one to figure out that it's too dangerous to live there.
Are you ready to retire? Or would you get a license in the state you move to?
All WiseOne needs to do is to move to CA, declare she is not a citizen ...... Freebies forever, who needs a large IRA or pension or 401(k) to retire? 8)
DNA has its own language (code), and language requires intelligence. There is no known mechanism by which matter can give birth to information, let alone language. It is unreasonable to believe the world could have happened by chance.
WiseOne
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 2692
Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2022 11:08 am

Re: Good news for drunk drivers in NY!

Post by WiseOne » Sun Jan 05, 2020 4:25 pm

I'd probably just retire. Chances are good I'd continue working as a consultant and keep up with general scholarly activity too.

Let's hope it doesn't happen. I'm curious if, this time around, the financial powers in this city step in to stop the madness. That would be Wall Street firms and a couple large private universities. I know they didn't act last time around, but history can be a powerful teacher.
Libertarian666
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 5994
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 6:00 pm

Re: Good news for drunk drivers in NY!

Post by Libertarian666 » Sun Jan 05, 2020 5:09 pm

WiseOne wrote:
Sun Jan 05, 2020 4:25 pm
I'd probably just retire. Chances are good I'd continue working as a consultant and keep up with general scholarly activity too.

Let's hope it doesn't happen. I'm curious if, this time around, the financial powers in this city step in to stop the madness. That would be Wall Street firms and a couple large private universities. I know they didn't act last time around, but history can be a powerful teacher.
“We learn from history that we do not learn from history.”
― Georg Hegel
User avatar
Ad Orientem
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 3483
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2011 2:47 pm
Location: Florida USA
Contact:

Re: Good news for drunk drivers in NY!

Post by Ad Orientem » Mon Jan 06, 2020 8:39 pm

I have a lot of issues with the new law which was ill conceived. But this doesn't strike me as a good example of the problems in it. The old cash bail system (which is still in place in much of the country) essentially favors wealthy defendants who can afford to post bail over poor ones who often can't, and who are locked up. Since bail is not supposed to be punitive and is only intended to deal with flight risks, this was problematic. Add to this a long history of DAs abusing the bail system to keep indigent defendants locked up for months, and in a few cases for years, without ever being brought to trial and there was clearly a need for reform. But as usual, New York's leaders couldn't pour piss from a boot with instructions spelled out in the heel.

Several other states figured out how to fix the problem by limiting cases where cash bail could be applied... BUT... they also wrote an exception into the law that would allow bail and detention in cases where the suspect had a track record that would cause reasonable people to believe they posed a serious threat to the community. This would include convicted violent criminals and gang members etc. Of course New York made no such provision. So... some people who in a sane society would not be allowed out of jail, will be.

All of which said, I'm not seeing the beef with this case. The suspect is accused of vehicular manslaughter. Is there reason to suspect he is going to kill witnesses or flee the country? The crime is terrible and if he is convicted he should be jailed. But, this was not likely an intentional act of violence. If he has an extensive criminal record that would be an issue. Again though I'm not seeing it. Bail is not supposed to be punishment. That comes after the defendant is convicted.
Libertarian666
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 5994
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 6:00 pm

Re: Good news for drunk drivers in NY!

Post by Libertarian666 » Tue Jan 07, 2020 3:46 pm

Ad Orientem wrote:
Mon Jan 06, 2020 8:39 pm
I have a lot of issues with the new law which was ill conceived. But this doesn't strike me as a good example of the problems in it. The old cash bail system (which is still in place in much of the country) essentially favors wealthy defendants who can afford to post bail over poor ones who often can't, and who are locked up. Since bail is not supposed to be punitive and is only intended to deal with flight risks, this was problematic. Add to this a long history of DAs abusing the bail system to keep indigent defendants locked up for months, and in a few cases for years, without ever being brought to trial and there was clearly a need for reform. But as usual, New York's leaders couldn't pour piss from a boot with instructions spelled out in the heel.

Several other states figured out how to fix the problem by limiting cases where cash bail could be applied... BUT... they also wrote an exception into the law that would allow bail and detention in cases where the suspect had a track record that would cause reasonable people to believe they posed a serious threat to the community. This would include convicted violent criminals and gang members etc. Of course New York made no such provision. So... some people who in a sane society would not be allowed out of jail, will be.

All of which said, I'm not seeing the beef with this case. The suspect is accused of vehicular manslaughter. Is there reason to suspect he is going to kill witnesses or flee the country? The crime is terrible and if he is convicted he should be jailed. But, this was not likely an intentional act of violence. If he has an extensive criminal record that would be an issue. Again though I'm not seeing it. Bail is not supposed to be punishment. That comes after the defendant is convicted.
Why would he show up for his trial? Nothing would happen to him if he just skipped town. If you don’t see how this makes New York much more dangerous, I give up.
WiseOne
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 2692
Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2022 11:08 am

Re: Good news for drunk drivers in NY!

Post by WiseOne » Wed Jan 08, 2020 9:10 am

Libertarian666 wrote:
Tue Jan 07, 2020 3:46 pm
Why would he show up for his trial? Nothing would happen to him if he just skipped town. If you don’t see how this makes New York much more dangerous, I give up.
Yes, that's exactly the problem. There is now no incentive whatsoever for defendants to turn up for a court date - especially if they know they're likely to be convicted. All they have to do is ignore all communications from the city, knowing that if they're picked up on the charge of contempt of court or whatever, that's also "nonviolent" so they'll just be promptly released again with a new court date.

To combat this issue, Mayor DeBlasio proposed bribing defendants with ballgame tickets and gift cards. Paid for with my tax money, of course.

It's true that we don't have enough information to judge just how much of a danger to the public this particular person was, but I'd say a hit and run is at least a possibility and apparently the judge wanted to impose bail but was unable to do so because of the new law. A better example is the woman who proceeded to carry out 3 separate anti-Semitic-motivated attacks on Hasidic Jews, was arrested after each one, but could not be held until after the third one, a judge ordered her held - not on bail or awaiting trial - but for a mental health review. Those rarely result in people being held for any length of time, it was just a temporizing measure to try to slow down the pace of attacks. And it's a trick that will only work once.

Is that enough for you?
User avatar
dualstow
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 14232
Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2010 10:18 am
Location: synagogue of Satan
Contact:

Re: Good news for drunk drivers in NY!

Post by dualstow » Wed Jan 08, 2020 1:33 pm

NY but not NYC:

New York politician who urged people to ‘drive sober’ arrested, charged with drunk driving
https://wtkr.com/2020/01/02/ny-politici ... iving-tmw/
Sam Bankman-Fried sentenced to 25 years
User avatar
Ad Orientem
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 3483
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2011 2:47 pm
Location: Florida USA
Contact:

Re: Good news for drunk drivers in NY!

Post by Ad Orientem » Wed Jan 08, 2020 1:53 pm

Libertarian666 wrote:
Tue Jan 07, 2020 3:46 pm
Ad Orientem wrote:
Mon Jan 06, 2020 8:39 pm
I have a lot of issues with the new law which was ill conceived. But this doesn't strike me as a good example of the problems in it. The old cash bail system (which is still in place in much of the country) essentially favors wealthy defendants who can afford to post bail over poor ones who often can't, and who are locked up. Since bail is not supposed to be punitive and is only intended to deal with flight risks, this was problematic. Add to this a long history of DAs abusing the bail system to keep indigent defendants locked up for months, and in a few cases for years, without ever being brought to trial and there was clearly a need for reform. But as usual, New York's leaders couldn't pour piss from a boot with instructions spelled out in the heel.

Several other states figured out how to fix the problem by limiting cases where cash bail could be applied... BUT... they also wrote an exception into the law that would allow bail and detention in cases where the suspect had a track record that would cause reasonable people to believe they posed a serious threat to the community. This would include convicted violent criminals and gang members etc. Of course New York made no such provision. So... some people who in a sane society would not be allowed out of jail, will be.

All of which said, I'm not seeing the beef with this case. The suspect is accused of vehicular manslaughter. Is there reason to suspect he is going to kill witnesses or flee the country? The crime is terrible and if he is convicted he should be jailed. But, this was not likely an intentional act of violence. If he has an extensive criminal record that would be an issue. Again though I'm not seeing it. Bail is not supposed to be punishment. That comes after the defendant is convicted.
Why would he show up for his trial? Nothing would happen to him if he just skipped town. If you don’t see how this makes New York much more dangerous, I give up.

That is not true. Failing to show up can result in added charges and time in prison if convicted. This guy doesn't sound like Al Capone to me. I don't think he has the intelligence or resources to go on the lam indefinitely. And in what way is him being out of jail making NY more dangerous? While his alleged crime is heinous it was not a deliberate act of criminal violence and I am not seeing any evidence that he is a high risk for either flight or violent criminal behavior. Do you think everybody charged with a felony should be locked up until their trial? (That's actually prohibited by the Constitution btw.) Do you think that only poor people who can't afford bail should be locked up until trial? What is your rational for bail? I am concerned you don't understand the legal and constitutional rational for it. Your commentary seems to imply that the suspect is presumptively guilty and locking him up until trial is OK.
Libertarian666
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 5994
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 6:00 pm

Re: Good news for drunk drivers in NY!

Post by Libertarian666 » Wed Jan 08, 2020 4:19 pm

As WiseOne said, failure to appear is also a non bailable offense, so he could just fall to appear again.

I’m done with this discussion.
Post Reply