Chesa Boudin. New York with cashless bail and non-prosecution of petty crimes. That fuck in Chicago.
Defund the police was a marquee policy and messaging failure that underlined why radical minorities capturing the Democratic Party cause it to lose elections.
>>This was tried. It generated a generational backlash against the left as petty crime and visible homelessness rose.
>Chesa Boudin.
Chesa Boudin is not a police budget, that's a completely unserious nonsequitor. SF's police budget rose throughout the defund the police movement, just not as high as initially allocated. https://abc7news.com/post/sfpd-budget-defund-the-police-depa...
What does that have to do with "defund the police"? Bail money doesn't go into their pockets.
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.
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.
Oh, they’re totally different policies. But they’re basically the same politics. And they both generated a backlash, one against messaging (because it was too stupid to implement) and one against policy (because it created more visible crime).
Roughly half a million people are in jail despite not being convicted of anything. That's roughly 25% of the incarcerated population in the US. 1/4 people behind bars are (presumed) innocent right now, even if they may later be found guilty.
That's a problem. Being in jail for a few weeks or even a few days can totally fuck someone's life over, costing them a job, a relationship, their health, or worse.
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.
Not sure what this is adding to the discussion, but eliminating cash bail has been a success in Illinois. That’s why you don’t hear the right talking about it anymore. Crime in Chicago has fallen every year since it went into effect.
https://www.cbsnews.com/chicago/news/cash-bail-illinois-one-...
Previously, if you had lots of liquid money, you could bail out for murder no problem.
I was locked up in Chicago with guys that had $50 bail and nobody to pay it for them.
I was trying to say that the system was previously unfair as it allowed violent crimes with long potential sentences bail (if you were rich), while those with petty offenses would be held (because they were poor).
I'm not sure if there is a perfect system, since everyone should be given the benefit of potential innocence, and jailing anyone who might end up being acquitted is a problem.