Illinois sheriffs prepare for 'America's most dangerous law' to come into effect

[lickin_starfish 1,890]

Liberals defending criminals again, I see.

[Patented Phil 1,469]

2 hours ago, seafoam1 said:

If he, his wife, or his kid were punched in the face by a criminal, he would change his tune quickly. He has no concern for the victim's feelings unless it were to affect him personally. 

Actually, I don’t think so.  I think he’d apologize to the criminal for her white privilege provoking it.  At the core of despicable Leftists like this is self-loathing.

[Baker Boy 1,687]

5 hours ago, dogcows said:

Cash bail is unjust. It’s also ineffective. Criminals who can post bail can still reoffend. Areas that eliminated cash bail did not see increases in failure to appear at trial or increases in crimes committed after arrest and before trial. It’s an outdated system that targets low-income people.

I will need a link for that because the opposite is true. I would really like to know where you got this misinformation.

[BuckSwope 654]

38 minutes ago, 5-Points said:

You're right. I don't want to put words in your mouth. What did you mean by "tilted towards?" 

We largely have a way of policing based on ticky-tac reasons to pull people over and look for weapons, drugs, hard criminals.   The lower class is more likely to have many of those reasons- broken light, whatever.   They are also more impacted from the fines, missed work time, things like that.  Tilted towards the lower class.   I mean we joke about cops sitting around, filling quotas, etc.   The cops I know also admit there is pressure to get out and hand out tickets.  

Where race comes in is AAs have a much higher %of them living in poverty, so things like this that have outcomes tilted to poor communities impact them more.  NOT because there are evil racists in gubment trying to hold down the black folk. 

It's been shown to be quite effective in very specific areas that are high crime, not as a universal method of policing.  

[squistion 1,945]

5 hours ago, dogcows said:

Cash bail is unjust. It’s also ineffective. Criminals who can post bail can still reoffend. Areas that eliminated cash bail did not see increases in failure to appear at trial or increases in crimes committed after arrest and before trial. It’s an outdated system that targets low-income people.

Try not to confuse them with the facts. 

[seafoam1 2,799]

Dang. Buttswipe is reaaly losing the day.

[Patented Phil 1,469]

The bail/bond system is as old as civilization itself.  And it’s a STATISTICAL CERTAINTY that eliminating bail will increase crime.  Think real real hard Left-Tards.

[5-Points 3,387]

22 minutes ago, BuckSwope said:

We largely have a way of policing based on ticky-tac reasons to pull people over and look for weapons, drugs, hard criminals.   The lower class is more likely to have many of those reasons- broken light, whatever.   They are also more impacted from the fines, missed work time, things like that.  Tilted towards the lower class.   I mean we joke about cops sitting around, filling quotas, etc.   The cops I know also admit there is pressure to get out and hand out tickets.  

Where race comes in is AAs have a much higher %of them living in poverty, so things like this that have outcomes tilted to poor communities impact them more.  NOT because there are evil racists in gubment trying to hold down the black folk. 

It's been shown to be quite effective in very specific areas that are high crime, not as a universal method of policing.  

Nobody gets arrested for a broken light. 

Learn how to act when you get pulled over. You aren't going to win an argument with a cop on the side of the road. Be polite and respectful. Odds are you go home with a warning. Maybe a ticket. But if you aren't an asshoIe or "riding dirty", you won't be taking a ride. 

It's less so poverty than it is sh!tty behavior that gets people arrested. Regardless of race. 

 

[BuckSwope 654]

1 minute ago, 5-Points said:

Nobody gets arrested for a broken light. 

Learn how to act when you get pulled over. You aren't going to win an argument with a cop on the side of the road. Be polite and respectful. Odds are you go home with a warning. Maybe a ticket. But if you aren't an asshoIe or "riding dirty", you won't be taking a ride. 

It's less so poverty than it is sh!tty behavior that gets people arrested. Regardless of race. 

 

That's part of it, and I never said they got arrested for broken lights only.  You guys really need to stop putting words in people's mouths.  Correct, maybe a ticket.  Sometimes those tickets pile up or the same person gets pulled over multiple times in a short period.  People then have to deal with that, going to court, things like that.  

Sorry for speaking out against that type of policing and wanting it to change, maybe even understand how it could make the populace resent cops.  We should just be good little citizens and take it and not ask questions, i guess.   It's not stopping the crime we all want to address, and it's increasing encounters and conflicts with police that end badly.  

 

[dogcows 1,030]

52 minutes ago, Baker Boy said:

I will need a link for that because the opposite is true. I would really like to know where you got this misinformation.

Here are the stats from New Jersey and the District of Columbia.

https://www.mdrc.org/publication/evaluation-pretrial-justice-system-reforms-use-public-safety-assessment-0

https://www.npr.org/2018/09/02/644085158/what-changed-after-d-c-ended-cash-bail

Both use a risk-assessment model to determine who to release and who to remand. Which, if you think about it, makes a lot more sense than letting people with money go and those without money stay. It’s also quite expensive to incarcerate the poor people who can’t afford bail. Based on these stats, seems like that is a waste of taxpayer money.

[5-Points 3,387]

5 minutes ago, BuckSwope said:

That's part of it, and I never said they got arrested for broken lights only.  You guys really need to stop putting words in people's mouths.  Correct, maybe a ticket.  Sometimes those tickets pile up or the same person gets pulled over multiple times in a short period.  People then have to deal with that, going to court, things like that.  

Sorry for speaking out against that type of policing and wanting it to change, maybe even understand how it could make the populace resent cops.  We should just be good little citizens and take it and not ask questions, i guess.   It's not stopping the crime we all want to address, and it's increasing encounters and conflicts with police that end badly.  

 

I never said you said that. Don't be so defensive. I was merely making the point that a broken light doesn't result in arrest all by itself. 

When tickets start piling up you become what is known as a habitual offender. That results in you being treated differently than some guy who got pulled over for a bulb being out. You get no sympathy from me when you continue to do sh!t you know will get you pulled over. 

Fix your sh!t or stay off the road. 

If you feel you've been mistreated, take it up with the proper authority at the appropriate time. The side of the road isn't that time. 

 

[dogcows 1,030]

24 minutes ago, 5-Points said:

Nobody gets arrested for a broken light. 

Sometimes they get summarily executed.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/sep/09/minnesota-prosecutor-philando-castile-cases-minor-traffic-violations

[Patented Phil 1,469]

55 minutes ago, seafoam1 said:

Dang. Buttswipe is reaaly losing the day.

Amazingly stupid.  Embarrassingly so.  These crime “reforms” are actually a huge gift to Conservatives:

- The inevitable increase in crime is going to occur smack dab in the heart of the Democrat world.

- The community most harmed will be black, law abiding Democrats.  These people have brains and they do vote.

- The people most helped will be the criminals.  These people don’t vote.

- There WILL BE spectacular failures with these criminal “reforms” - and they will all be highly newsworthy.  A young lady will be murdered by a violent ex-boyfriend who had just been arrested and let back out the day before after beating the shitt out of her.

So keep it up Left-Tards.  More laws like this in Liberal cities and states.

[5-Points 3,387]

5 minutes ago, dogcows said:

Sometimes they get summarily executed.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/sep/09/minnesota-prosecutor-philando-castile-cases-minor-traffic-violations

From your link:

 "the officer opened fire immediately after warning her boyfriend not to reach for a licensed gun he said he owned.

In June 2017, a jury acquitted Yanez of manslaughter and other charges"

 

So he didn't get "summarily executed" for a broken light. He was shot because he was, at least perceived to be, reaching for a gun. And the officer involved was acquitted. 

Do you read your own links? 

 

[Patented Phil 1,469]

2 minutes ago, 5-Points said:

From your link:

 "the officer opened fire immediately after warning her boyfriend not to reach for a licensed gun he said he owned.

In June 2017, a jury acquitted Yanez of manslaughter and other charges"

 

So he didn't get "summarily executed" for a broken light. He was shot because he was, at least perceived to be, reaching for a gun. And the officer involved was acquitted. 

Do you read your own links? 

 

Such a dumbass.

[BuckSwope 654]

9 minutes ago, 5-Points said:

I never said you said that. Don't be so defensive. I was merely making the point that a broken light doesn't result in arrest all by itself. 

When tickets start piling up you become what is known as a habitual offender. That results in you being treated differently than some guy who got pulled over for a bulb being out. You get no sympathy from me when you continue to do sh!t you know will get you pulled over. 

Fix your sh!t or stay off the road. 

If you feel you've been mistreated, take it up with the proper authority at the appropriate time. The side of the road isn't that time. 

 

Then why even bring it up responding to me?   

I don't even disagree with you about encounter at the side of road- not the time.  We just seem to disagree about that type of policing is wrong to begin with, and I have a little more sympathy for people struggling needing a car for work.  The bolded is overly simplistic and ignorant, imo. 

[Patented Phil 1,469]

2 minutes ago, BuckSwope said:

Then why even bring it up responding to me?   

I don't even disagree with you about encounter at the side of road- not the time.  We just seem to disagree about that type of policing is wrong to begin with, and I have a little more sympathy for people struggling needing a car for work.  The bolded is overly simplistic and ignorant, imo. 

Right.  Fixing a broken car light is highly complicated.  And not something we should expect a poor person to get done.  Actually - it is IGNORANT to have this expectation.

Seriously - do ever stop and read the dumbasss shitt you post?

[5-Points 3,387]

5 minutes ago, BuckSwope said:

Then why even bring it up responding to me?   

I don't even disagree with you about encounter at the side of road- not the time.  We just seem to disagree about that type of policing is wrong to begin with, and I have a little more sympathy for people struggling needing a car for work.  The bolded is overly simplistic and ignorant, imo. 

Cops are charged with enforcing the laws. If you aren't in violation of any laws you won't encounter the police. 

If you are carrying drugs, guns, alcohol, or anything else you shouldn't be in possession of, it would behoove you to make sure all your sh!t works before you hit the road. 

If you aren't carrying anything illegal or have any warrants, a busted taillight isn't going to land you in jail. Which was your point in favor of doing away with bail. 

 

[5-Points 3,387]

4 minutes ago, Patented Phil said:

Right.  Fixing a broken car light is highly complicated.  And not something we should expect a poor person to get done.  Actually - it is IGNORANT to have this expectation.

Seriously - do ever stop and read the dumbasss shitt you post?

Poor people can't be expected to adhere to the same basic vehicle maintenance standards the rest of us are held to. 

That's racist, or something. 

[BuckSwope 654]

Just now, 5-Points said:

Cops are charged with enforcing the laws. If you aren't in violation of any laws you won't encounter the police. 

If you are carrying drugs, guns, alcohol, or anything else you shouldn't be in possession of, it would behoove you to make sure all your sh!t works before you hit the road. 

If you aren't carrying anything illegal or have any warrants, a busted taillight isn't going to land you in jail. Which was your point in favor of doing away with bail. 

 

I also never said anything about doing away with bail.  All of you guys with this. 

MY bigger point and issue is about what i have been talking about.  Bail is part of that, but not my biggest issue.  

We don't agree, thats cool.  Id rather see a focus on training and targeting the specific areas and times where the most crime is happening and the dangerous criminals are.  I'd like less cops, but focused trained cops.  I'd love less of these dumb interactions that would greatly improve the cops' job too. 

But that requires saying dirty words like reallocate or defund that gets you labeled pro-criminal instead of pro-cop or regular citizens around here.   

[Patented Phil 1,469]

2 hours ago, 5-Points said:

Poor people can't be expected to adhere to the same basic vehicle maintenance standards the rest of us are held to. 

That's racist, or something. 

the soft bigotry of low expectations.

[Hardcore troubadour 14,922]

2 hours ago, BuckSwope said:

Ferguson report. 

And how is crime doing in Ferguson since the report? Have things improved for the people there? Quick, say poverty. 

[Hardcore troubadour 14,922]

Liberals analysis of crime: White  Kid gets locked up in the suburbs for stealing a car, given a light sentence. Black Kid gets locked up for the same crime, does time.  Racist. That’s it, no further analysis required.  

[Fnord 2,051]

4 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Liberals analysis of crime: White  Kid gets locked up in the suburbs for stealing a car, given a light sentence. Black Kid gets locked up for the same crime, does time.  Racist. That’s it, no further analysis required.  

LOL. When was the last time you analyzed anything deeper than a teens tiktok feed? You make more stupid declarations without support than anyone other than suckfoam, and he's 10 IQ points short of a potato chip. What's your excuse? Just coasting on your laurels of "being a big deal around here?"

[Hardcore troubadour 14,922]

1 minute ago, Fnord said:

LOL. When was the last time you analyzed anything deeper than a teens tiktok feed? You make more stupid declarations without support than anyone other than suckfoam, and he's 10 IQ points short of a potato chip. What's your excuse? Just coasting on your laurels of "being a big deal around here?"

I hope that felt good, but let’s dig in. Go. 

[Fnord 2,051]

2 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

I hope that felt good, but let’s dig in. Go. 

It did feel good, I admit it. It's Saturday. My honey-do's are done for the day. Only thing I'm digging into is choosing libations for tonight. 

[League Champion 1,896]

25 minutes ago, BuckSwope said:

We don't agree, thats cool.  Id rather see a focus on training and targeting the specific areas and times where the most crime is happening and the dangerous criminals are.  I'd like less cops, but focused trained cops.  I'd love less of these dumb interactions that would greatly improve the cops' job too. 

Again, you're worried about the Police, not the actual criminal. Sympathizing with the criminal is the most liberal thing ever. 

DON'T COMMIT CRIME AND YOU WONT NEED TO WORRY ABOUT POLICE. 

 

[Fnord 2,051]

Just now, Patented Phil said:

The analysis onus is on the idiots wanting to change the time-tested process.

I do not give a flying fuk about this topic. I'm ragging on HT because he brings it on himself. I have zero desire for any exchanges with you. You seem pretty one-note and boring.

[5-Points 3,387]

24 minutes ago, BuckSwope said:

I also never said anything about doing away with bail.  All of you guys with this. 

MY bigger point and issue is about what i have been talking about.  Bail is part of that, but not my biggest issue.  

We don't agree, thats cool.  Id rather see a focus on training and targeting the specific areas and times where the most crime is happening and the dangerous criminals are.  I'd like less cops, but focused trained cops.  I'd love less of these dumb interactions that would greatly improve the cops' job too. 

But that requires saying dirty words like reallocate or defund that gets you labeled pro-criminal instead of pro-cop or regular citizens around here.   

Your posts in this thread seem to be in favor of the law in the OP. If I'm wrong, perhaps you haven't been clear enough in your support or non-support of the topic. 

I'd like less need for cops. In order for that to happen we need fewer criminals on the street. 

Picking them up and letting them go doesn't achieve that goal. 

[BuckSwope 654]

40 minutes ago, 5-Points said:

Cops are charged with enforcing the laws. If you aren't in violation of any laws you won't encounter the police. 

If you are carrying drugs, guns, alcohol, or anything else you shouldn't be in possession of, it would behoove you to make sure all your sh!t works before you hit the road. 

If you aren't carrying anything illegal or have any warrants, a busted taillight isn't going to land you in jail. Which was your point in favor of doing away with bail. 

 

Yes, they technically are doing that.  That's not in debate either.  

To me the "why" is the important part, and if that should be the police role (making a minor infraction a reason for a stop and not a ticket, for example). 

I understand why cities continue to police this way- it's a revenue stream.  I don't like government bloat, so I would like a more focused and trained force targeting actual criminals and high crime areas.   That type of policing is effective in only select areas, but we largely use it as a blunt hammer.  I'd like it to change, you say don't drive unless your car is 100% up to city code. 

[Hardcore troubadour 14,922]

23 minutes ago, Fnord said:

It did feel good, I admit it. It's Saturday. My honey-do's are done for the day. Only thing I'm digging into is choosing libations for tonight. 

Nice. I’m enjoying my WT Miller Lite in a chilled Stella glass. I’m all class. 

[BuckSwope 654]

17 minutes ago, 5-Points said:

Your posts in this thread seem to be in favor of the law in the OP. If I'm wrong, perhaps you haven't been clear enough in your support or non-support of the topic. 

I'd like less need for cops. In order for that to happen we need fewer criminals on the street. 

Picking them up and letting them go doesn't achieve that goal. 

Again, I agree, that is not my position.  I never said to do away with bail, and even clarified later I thought it was a small part of the issue here.  I hope my above post clarifies. 

[EternalShinyAndChrome 3,829]

4 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Nice. I’m enjoying my WT Miller Lite in a chilled Stella glass. 

and tranny-free beer to boot.

[BuckSwope 654]

7 minutes ago, EternalShinyAndChrome said:

and tranny-free beer to boot.

The most important factor when choosing your cheap horse piss.

[5-Points 3,387]

15 minutes ago, BuckSwope said:

Yes, they technically are doing that.  That's not in debate either.  

To me the "why" is the important part, and if that should be the police role (making a minor infraction a reason for a stop and not a ticket, for example). 

I understand why cities continue to police this way- it's a revenue stream.  I don't like government bloat, so I would like a more focused and trained force targeting actual criminals and high crime areas.   That type of policing is effective in only select areas, but we largely use it as a blunt hammer.  I'd like it to change, you say don't drive unless your car is 100% up to city code. 

The broken light is a valid reason for the stop. Why have codes if we aren't going to enforce them? 

Should it make a difference to the cop if the car he is stopping for a taillight out is a Mercedes or a pos Datsun? 

DUI checkpoints on a holiday weekend are what I call a "fund raiser" but they also take drunk drivers off the road. 

I don't see the problem. 

[League Champion 1,896]

20 minutes ago, EternalShinyAndChrome said:

and tranny-free beer to boot.

It just tastes better 

[dogcows 1,030]

1 hour ago, 5-Points said:

Cops are charged with enforcing the laws. If you aren't in violation of any laws you won't encounter the police. 

Cops kill innocent people all the time.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Elijah_McClain

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/09/us/police-shooting-video-arizona.html

https://reason.com/2021/10/07/andrew-finch-wichita-kansas-swatting-police-shooting-qualified-immunity/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Breonna_Taylor

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2019/10/01/amber-guygers-botham-jean-murder-trial-using-texas-castle-doctrine/

 

[Reality 3,092]

I don't even know what to say anymore, I guess I'm just thankful that I don't have to deal with people this focking stupid on a day to day basis.

[easilyscan 858]

2 hours ago, BuckSwope said:

We largely have a way of policing based on ticky-tac reasons to pull people over and look for weapons, drugs, hard criminals.   The lower class is more likely to have many of those reasons- broken light, whatever.   They are also more impacted from the fines, missed work time, things like that.  Tilted towards the lower class.   I mean we joke about cops sitting around, filling quotas, etc.   The cops I know also admit there is pressure to get out and hand out tickets.  

Where race comes in is AAs have a much higher %of them living in poverty, so things like this that have outcomes tilted to poor communities impact them more.  NOT because there are evil racists in gubment trying to hold down the black folk. 

It's been shown to be quite effective in very specific areas that are high crime, not as a universal method of policing.  

As you said in the last sentence, policing based on tacky-tak policing often results in finding the offender has outstanding warrants. That used to be called good police work. 

Unless you believe they can't afford it, I don't understand why the lower class is more likely to be driving with things like a broken light, whatever. I own a 2012 Ford Escape & it tells me when I have a burnt out turn signal bulb, burnt out headlight, tail light, etc. When that happens, I go to O'Reilly auto, buy the replacement part, & fix it. For license plate tabs/stickers, in my state you get a notice in the mail about 1.5 months before they expire. To order new ones, you have plenty of choices. Go to the local DPS office in person, send them a check, or go online and order.

I think it's laziness more than anything else.

But that's not good enough for the Democrats, at least not in my state. Because African-Americans are pulled over more often for things like expired tabs, broken tail light, bulbs, etc., they come up with asinine rules for local law-enforcement. When an officer sees someone with one of the aforementioned violations, they are only supposed to make note of the license plate number & contact the registered owner. The attorney general in Ramsey county (St. Paul MN) said he wouldn't prosecute any felonies that were initiated by an officer pulling someone over for any of the aforementioned reasons. How the fock can that even be legal? How the hell can an AG in one of the biggest counties in Minnesota, say he isn't going to prosecute felonies ?

Here's one 'mostly' for African-Americans. How can you not know that you have illegal window tint ? 

So focking dark you can't see anything inside even in broad daylight!

Yet they wonder why they get pulled over so often.

[seafoam1 2,799]

11 minutes ago, dogcows said:

Cops kill innocent people all the time.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Elijah_McClain

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/09/us/police-shooting-video-arizona.html

https://reason.com/2021/10/07/andrew-finch-wichita-kansas-swatting-police-shooting-qualified-immunity/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Breonna_Taylor

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2019/10/01/amber-guygers-botham-jean-murder-trial-using-texas-castle-doctrine/

 

So a guy doing whatever he was doing while wearing a mask and scaring other people was confronted by cops and he fought with them and ended up dead.

Oh the horror!!