When they are out in 24 hours? 🤔

Well they aren't "above the law" if they're subject to fines under the law though right?

Probably wasn’t released specifically under the bail reform law. Lots of people are released and some scream about bail reform and others scream how that wasn’t bail reform.

We need more bail reform, making it easier for some to get out and harder for others to get reduced charges etc.

Yeah it's pretty widespread

>Indeed, Adams is far from the only elected official facing campaign finance fines. Last month the board voted to fine Public Advocate Jumaane Williams $7,524 for failing to document transactions, accepting contributions over the legal limit, and taking money from corporations among eight charges stemming from his 2019 campaign for public advocate. In January, the board fined Brooklyn Borough President Antonio Reynoso $6,922 for issues with his Transition Inauguration Entity.

Also why does a borough president need a "Transition Inauguration Entity" at all?

The same way the rest of the world does it? Either overnight deliveries via the pedestrian space or daytime deliveries parked on a side street and carted the short block to the store.

Exactly. Market rate housing is pretty much as needed, if not more needed, than solely affordable housing.

But lots of people campaign on vote for blue no matter who

[deleted]

“No one is above the law” - says by the people who are above the law

Yeah, you probably want NY Post's version of this data. Oh wait, they won't even report on it as it doesn't fit their narrative.

> First, is that re-arrests for violent felony increased, and that is the one statistic that actually matters. Secondly, that “slight” increase occurred despite the fact that overall arrests decreased dramatically during the pandemic.

No, VFO re-arrests were down slightly, only among specific subgroups did the VFO re-arrest go up according to the study, for the other groups it was down. Because of that the overall VFO rate was lower.

Some people have other expenses like healthcare/childcare, but generally I feel like its a financial literacy issue because so many people in America just live as close to their means as possible no matter how much they make.

No, that's not really how you should read that.

If violent felony re-arrests drops among the entire group, even if it went up slightly in one cohort, that's still a net drop. The recently had violent arrests groups is a small overall group.

So if you take this study at face value (Which, statistical studies like this are always going to be tough, and this is happening in the middle of a massive upheaval that makes any kind of data hard to parse) bail reform would suggest a lower number of re-arrests for crimes in total, and that bail reform dropped crime overall.

EITHER WAY, even the studies I've had that are more more critical of bail reform show very small effects. In terms of overall crime rates, bail reform is mostly just an emotional issue.

[removed]

As a characterization of what the study found it is misleading because it’s a cherry picked metric

The re-arrest rate of petit larcenists, who rack up numerous cases, is more than enough to skew the entire study.

And like I said in my reply to your other comment, this data doesn't say what you claim it does, and isn't even valid in the first place.

> I mean, crime is incredibly related to poverty. Sure things like access to quality education or stable housing also help,

Hot beds of crime, places like Ghana, India and Vietnam.

You haven't given me any relevant data. All you've done is given me correlations. Why not look at the actual income of convicted arrestees rather than using race as a proxy like some sort of nazi? You're also missing the nuance of economic insecurity vs poverty. A person can be impoverished and not economically insecure. Asian immigrant communities tend to have strong social support networks that make food and housing security less of an issue. Black and Latino communities are also far more heavily policed, so that data wouldn't be valid even if it did indicate what you claim it does.

I would just point out a few things. First, is that re-arrests for violent felony increased, and that is the one statistic that actually matters. Secondly, that “slight” increase occurred despite the fact that overall arrests decreased dramatically during the pandemic. Thirdly, this was basically a “study” funded by the Arnold Foundation, which states very clearly on its website that it is strongly in favor of bail reform: “We must reform every aspect of the pre-trial system from policing to bail…”. Fourthly, this wasn’t a study that was published in an academic journal after peer-review. It appears to be a self-published report. I’m all for using data to guide policy and legislative decisions. The data is what it is. But the way that data is interpreted and presented can introduce a lot of bias. This study could just have easily been titled “Study shows that re-arrests for violent felonies increased after bail reform.”

Thanks for understanding. Hope ya have a good one.

Rules for thee but not for me

Well keep limiting new housing with bizarre requirements and this will keep happening.

You know how you make apartments affordable for those making belo $100k? Making sure the apartments they could afford aren’t being taken by those making $150k because nothing else is available.

Am I good to board a flight from NYC -> FL with a glass pipe?

That's fair.