Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

sebster wrote:The point is that setting such stupidly high bail for a person who is of otherwise good standing is forcing people to spend the time up until their trail in prison.

Yep, its kind of the point.

Again,its only stupidly high if similar crimes have different levels of bail.

Here's a tip to numb nuts. The next time you have to pull a pistol on someone and they run away, don't sit there and check you car for damage. Its almost like your asking for them to come back.

dogma wrote:Yep. It is punishment without conviction.

Indeed. This is the problem with "tough on crime" laws...

Melissia wrote:

dogma wrote:Yep. It is punishment without conviction.

Indeed. This is the problem with "tough on crime" laws...

respectfully, thats no a tough on crime law. Thats bail. Thats a completely different item.

What was the amount $225,000? Thats $25,000 with a bail bondsman. Its steep but he at least shot at some people. Is $25,000 too much for attempted murder? *

*frazzled thinks this is too high and not appropriate. But then again Frazzled lives in Texas were men are men and women are awesome, and this sort of thing wouldn't get that far in the first place.

Given my experience with zero tolerance laws and rules put in to effect by government organizations, this is EXACTLY what results.

Melissia wrote:Given my experience with zero tolerance laws and rules put in to effect by government organizations, this is EXACTLY what results.

Define "this" M. Bail comes our way from British common law and its designed to insure parties don't flee. In other countries you don't get bail. In Yankee states claiming self defense won't work. Help me out.

By "this" I meant that Zero Tolerance / Tough on Crime laws don't just set the laws, they set the attitude of those who enforce them. This frequently results in stupidity.

Melissia wrote:By "this" I meant that Zero Tolerance / Tough on Crime laws don't just set the laws, they set the attitude of those who enforce them. This frequently results in stupidity.

Potentially. Bail is separate in that each jrusidiction has its separate guidelines modified potentially bu statute, or inversely nothing bu the judge's view.

Here's the rub. If that area's bail settings are routinely high then there's no issue. If however, this break's the bell curve - and again we're not sure what he was actuallly charged with- then there's a much greater issue.

As noted I'd proffer thats pretty high for Texas, but I don't know about that state. I'd also proffer that on those facts I'd doubt he would have been charged in the first place.

Ludicrously high bail isn't a good idea even if it's the norm, unless you have reasonable suspicion that they'll flee.

Having it be the norm isn't a good idea either, but meh.

Melissia wrote:Ludicrously high bail isn't a good idea even if it's the norm, unless you have reasonable suspicion that they'll flee.

Having it be the norm isn't a good idea either, but meh.

Frazled does not disagree with either of these points. Evidently Frazzled is also channeling Bob Dole and talking in the third person now.