← Back to context

Comment by JumpCrisscross

20 days ago

It was part of the police reform initiative. I supported it. But it massively increased the street population of recidivist bastards in a way I didn’t expect.

It was never about the recidivist bastards and always about the normal guy with a job he doesn't want to lose not losing that job when he can't come up with bail for a DUI. At least where I was it was considered kind of a given the recidivist bastards would get out on bail and that the bondsman getting paid really doesn't affect outcomes.

  • > It was never about the recidivist bastards and always about the normal guy with a job he doesn't want to lose not losing that job when he can't come up with bail for a DUI

    And that’s why I supported it. But for every one of the latter there are many of the former because they started cycling through arrests so fast.

    Keep the recidivist bastard in jail, on the other hand, and they are incapacitated for the time being. I’ll admit I didn’t see the utility of that until it was too late.

Conflating "police reform" and "defund the police" is disingenuous.

  • > Conflating "police reform" and "defund the police" is disingenuous

    In New York they were one and the same. The latter simply representing the most extreme expression of the former.

    I remember dropping into a leftist conference in Philadelphia years ago where several folks who would become the face of post-Covid police reform were there, including Boudin. At the end of the day they all conceded that their goal was abolishing this, that and the other thing.

    • > In New York they were one and the same.

      As a NY resident: lol.

      I don't doubt you'll find activists espousing both "defund the police" and "end cash bail" policies at the same time. That doesn't make them the same policy.

      1 reply →