5476
Comments (295)
sorted by:
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
2
Thundermark 2 points ago +2 / -0

Don't get me wrong, I'm very glad these scumbags are getting arrested and not let go.

But a couple questions:

Why do we even allow bail for observably violent detainees?

Also, does bail as an incentive to not skip town lest your money be used to pay a bounty hunter to drag your ass back even make sense anymore in the modern world where anyone can just instantly wire money to anyone else around the world?

Imagine if, for instance, Red China, started paying Anti-American/pro-China criminals to take disruptive actions and then wired them bail money through shell orgs.

I'm not saying I have a definitive solution (and no, I'm certainly not for just letting them go, look how disastrous that "experiment" was in NY), just the way it is right now overall doesn't seem to make much sense.

1
PanderjitSingh 1 point ago +1 / -0

Bail is completely inappropriate for people who are transients associated with an international criminal organization. They must be among the most likely to go into hiding and not come to court.

Even having a charity pay bail is completely inappropriate and an abuse of the bail system. The whole point is to ensure people show up for court by making them put something at risk.