Submitted by Finngolian_Monk t3_121gmjx in news
RollerDude347 t1_jdm0kss wrote
Reply to comment by wolfofremus in 17-year-old charged in kidnapping ending in Houston shooting by Finngolian_Monk
We already pay the people who would do that work whether anyone runs or not.
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.
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.
wolfofremus t1_jdm5mny wrote
It better be paid by the suspect and not tax payer.
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.
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.
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.
kennypu t1_jdoldhu wrote
lmao what, bail money is returned after they show up. it's a collateral.
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.
edenaxela1436 t1_jdowya4 wrote
Entirely incorrect.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments