Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

wolfofremus t1_jdlyj1s wrote

Reply to comment by SunsetKittens in 17-year-old charged in kidnapping ending in Houston shooting by Finngolian_Monk

There is case where the suspect is not hazard, but they can run a way so the bond use to cover the cost of bringing them back to court.

−23

RollerDude347 t1_jdm0kss wrote

We already pay the people who would do that work whether anyone runs or not.

24

wolfofremus t1_jdm1e7o wrote

Tax is not enough to pay for everything. Given how hard it is to get money from criminal, punishment for running away is better be paid upfront.

−29

RollerDude347 t1_jdm4wpc wrote

Everything, and I mean every resource I think you'd reasonably use to catch a non-violent suspect, has ALREADY been paid for.

22

wolfofremus t1_jdm5mny wrote

It better be paid by the suspect and not tax payer.

−28

RollerDude347 t1_jdm6iio wrote

It's already paid for by the tax payer. It's the existing police force. Literally nothing new will be provided for with bail money.

23

wolfofremus t1_jdm7b0a wrote

Bail money also go to the police and juridical. Remove bail mean more tax will require to cover the lost revenue from bail.

−14

RollerDude347 t1_jdmpgjn wrote

You're aware that the bail is given back if they don't run, correct?

Bail serves no purpose except to cuase poor people to lose their jobs for a crime they have not been convicted of.

32

kennypu t1_jdoldhu wrote

lmao what, bail money is returned after they show up. it's a collateral.

5

wolfofremus t1_jdph7c5 wrote

So it a great incentive for people to show up, and we do not have to hide more police to chase after those.

−1