Hacker News Reader

Comment by CobrastanJorji | Hacker News Reader

I was suggesting that the entire idea of bail money was a bad one, for exactly the reason you describe. Rich people simply leave a deposit, and poor people effectively pay a permanent fine of 10% of that deposit regardless of their innocence.

The idea of ensuring someone shows up to trial by holding onto something they value isn't terrible, but the implementation certainly is. If you want to set bail, why is it based mostly on the crime and not on the wealth of the suspect? $1000 of bail means nothing to a billionaire and everything to someone living hand to mouth.

View on HN

You're right! The system should allow defendants to offer up something of immense sentimental value as bail security instead of cash they don't have -- like a wedding ring or family heirloom or their child's favorite stuffed toy. That would relieve the financial burden that the bail system imposes on the poor.

Oh wait, the Copenhagen Ethicists[1] would clutch the pearls at the mere discussion of that, too.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10367855

Sentimental value? Seems like a very easy system to game.

Sure, it's hard to protect against an adversary who really wants to convince you they care about that cheap violin "that grandpa totally gave to me on his deathbed".

But that wasn't core to my point, which was that the criticism of bail bonds lacks a coherent value system and model the problem such that can consistently identify improvements, and instead, just responds with outrage at every proposal.

> But that wasn't core to my point, which was that the criticism of bail bonds last a coherent value system and model the problem such that can consistently identify improvements, and instead, just responds with outrage at every proposal.

The critics not only don't lack such a vision, there is a fairly consistent outline of an alternative proposed, and it's even had an implementation in the District of Columbia for a couple of decades.

And how does Google withdrawing bail bonds ads fit into that value system?

Edit: The point isn't whether you can refactor to a better system. The point was the lack of a coherent model for what local changes would make it better or worse, and why.

> And how does Google withdrawing bail bonds ads fit into that value system?

It has little direct effect but draws attention to the issue.

And to the groups Google worked with.

One of which is also a prime backer of the active CA legislation to begin adopting the alternative model in CA.

Thanks for clarifying. It wasn't clear enough to me that the first paragraph was all just a setup for the last sentence.

What would be a good replacement for the bail system?

> $1000 of bail means nothing to a billionaire and everything to someone living hand to mouth.

This is surely true, but also irrelevant since bail is set in relation to the individual's means. Pretending that a rich person could ever have such insignificant bail is disingenuous.

I'm no expert here, so perhaps you can enlighten me. Isn't the whole idea of a "bail schedule" or a "bail algorithm" to have set amounts of bail for a certain crime, like "this person is accused of a DUI, has committed no previous crimes, bail is therefore $1000?" Does wealth provide any sort of multiplier?

It certainly can be a multiplier. See $66M bail in the case of this wealthy heiress (whom I believe had no previous record): http://www.scmp.com/news/world/united-states-canada/article/...

This was undoubtedly also because she was a flight risk. But this is the case with all super-wealthy people who have means to flee the jurisdiction (private jets or access to other private transportation).

This doesn't mean a rich person will have a high bail amount for all types of crimes, but this would be taking into consideration their ties to the community (own a mansion in town? You're probably not going to leave it behind. Ditto for your high-paying job.) Not saying any of this is fair — just that this is how the bail-setting factors get applied.

> What would be a good replacement for the bail system?

Pre-trial supervision instead of money bail when the community risk doesn't preclude release in the first place. This is, incidentally, already in place in DC.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/when-it-c...

> What would be a good replacement for the bail system?

I think the non-profit system might deserve some exploration. I posted above about a TED talk I watched recently on the subject and their numbers look quite interesting. It'd be great to see it replicated elsewhere.

Well, now we're changing the definition of justice based on your income. If I have 0 income and 0 assets, may I do anything I please? Should Warren Buffett pay millions for jaywalking?

It's probably a good idea for the penalties to be the same in society regardless of wealth.

It's an open question. In Scandinavia, they apparently scale fines based on wealth: https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/03/finland...

It is important to be able to sufficiently deter people from committing various crimes/infractions, and this is one way to do it. In the US, we have "points" that go on your record, which means that rich people can't get speeding tickets that frequently — you eventually lose your license. And if you're going 25 over the limit, you can be charged with reckless driving.

I'm aware of how scandinavia structures those penalties and I frankly prefer social economic status-blind policies.

It's reasonable to disagree.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com