Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

CALIFORINA ending cash Bail! (and is this an "oppertunity" for Security?)

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • CALIFORINA ending cash Bail! (and is this an "oppertunity" for Security?)

    Because I know its sure an opportunity for judges to take bribes.

    IIRC, unless something really weird is going on, the Bail set by a judge goes by "guidelines". Noted Criminal Defense lawyer told me "All these new judges are same, they come in thinking they are gonna be tough but then they find out that means a lot more work when their stuff gets appealed and (forget term but whatever you do when judge veers outside guidelines).

    Article seems to say new law will leave "middle ground" up to judges.

    What I see missing is any "middle ground" practice. No mention of Ankle Bracelets (shouldn't there be a good slang term for those?) or Half-Way Houses (so far not used in awaiting trial cases) or any other sort of Check In or Home Visit programs.

    So I'm thinking, for Private Security, there might be a YUGE new (and sudden) opportunity for someone other than already burdened LEOs or P.O.s to do various levels of Monitoring Of Releasees.

    IIRC Ankles were something the Releasee paid for, but if it would be cheaper for Jail to pay for Ankle than Jail then maybe that would happen.

    Only thing that really matters is if CA State will pay County Jails for coming up with reasons to hold people in Jail. Used to be County lost money on Jail and would release anyone unless there was a real risk, then CA started paying Counties and suddenly Bail went up and judges got "tough on crime" and everyone was getting held.

    Naturally, all the Bail Bonds guys are very much against letting people out of jail without them taking a YUGE cut. Funny, all their ads were about "we want you out of jail", now they are "CRIMINALS BEING RELEASED...PUBLIC IN DANGER!"

    THAT could also be a great opportunity to SELL private security, particularly for stuff like Private Residential Patrols for upscale communities that are giving up on their Civil Service police. Not sure about HOME break ins but GTA is considered "non violent" in CA.




    https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/08/...nter-the-left/

  • Consolewatcher
    replied
    Originally posted by Condo Guard View Post
    I think Console is right - D.C. is one of those cities with strict gun laws, but you have a whole hub of politicians, lobbyists and "high value assets" that need protection.

    As far as bail goes, I agree for minor offenses just get rid of it, if it makes sense (first time offender with a job, etc.). The problem is you have a whole population in this country that moves around by choice, either due to mental illness, drug addiction or being a professional criminal. There is no incentive to show up for court, and in cities like Seattle where you have to be swinging a sword at someone to get a cop's attention, little risk of ever being picked up. Bail theoretically gives them an incentive to "stay in the system" and get things worked out one way or another.
    I think bail reform can't be possible without sentencing reform. A person who gets bail and who is facing, say, a six month or year sentence for possession of cocaine will probably realize he's better off going to court and doing the time. The same person facing, say, a five to ten year sentence for the same crime is probably going to skip court and "lay low".

    Of course, very few politicians are able to pursue major sentencing reform because they don't want to be perceived as being "soft on crime". The best they can usually do is to try to curtail some of the more extreme punishments.

    Leave a comment:


  • Soper
    replied
    Originally posted by TOII View Post

    Who said they did entire cities and towns? I sure didn't. So please stop changing the goal posts. They are contract police agencies for hire,some work for transit agencies,universities,hospitals etc, and ARE fully certified Police officers with full academy training, with powers of arrest and marked police vehicles.
    Where? You posted the claim, now you can show us where it's being done. That's not changing a thing, it's asking for proof.

    Leave a comment:


  • Condo Guard
    replied
    I think Console is right - D.C. is one of those cities with strict gun laws, but you have a whole hub of politicians, lobbyists and "high value assets" that need protection.

    As far as bail goes, I agree for minor offenses just get rid of it, if it makes sense (first time offender with a job, etc.). The problem is you have a whole population in this country that moves around by choice, either due to mental illness, drug addiction or being a professional criminal. There is no incentive to show up for court, and in cities like Seattle where you have to be swinging a sword at someone to get a cop's attention, little risk of ever being picked up. Bail theoretically gives them an incentive to "stay in the system" and get things worked out one way or another.

    Leave a comment:


  • Consolewatcher
    replied
    Originally posted by Condo Guard View Post
    I remember a discussion here years ago about "special police" certifications in Washington, D.C. - essentially private security with academy training and full arrest powers.

    Mixing public and private duties carries risks. Privatization was all the rage in the U.S. and the U.K. for awhile, but it had very mixed results. Most of it was just a ploy to get around union rules or to try to streamline the bureaucracy. I have no problem with privatizing police support officers and the like, but LE duties should be left to the government.

    Rather than decriminalizing crime (which is essentially what eliminating bail does), governments should look at diversion programs or preventive measures (but that gets into social policy, and government never seems to be good at that).
    IIRC in D.C. non-sworn private or public security couldn't legally carry a gun, so if you wanted your guards to be armed you had to get them sworn in as "special police" even if they were never allowed to actually use their police powers.

    Leave a comment:


  • Squid
    replied
    Originally posted by Condo Guard View Post

    Rather than decriminalizing crime (which is essentially what eliminating bail does), governments should look at .
    Back when the USA was Quakers, Puritans and others of the most intrepid and self reliant of the British Isles, Bail was solely to ensure the Accused would show at trial, since there wasn't any good way of tracking people.

    Back then being "shunned" was a real punishment, and could be life threatening.

    Bail is supposed to be only for people that might seriously flee, and not worry that a Bench Warrant would be out on them for the rest of their lives.

    Its not supposed to be for your average citizen busted for DUI, or even auto theft, etc.

    If there is a real danger of 'repeat offense' then a Judge can issue an RO, and violation of RO means "held until trial/hearing". IIRC, judges can issue an RO for just about anything, including "no drinking booze, including at home".

    One of the big problems in USA with Law Enforcement is the cops think it is their job to punish law breakers. Its not, it is the COURT's job to punish, and its the cop's job to present a case.

    There is a strong For Profit bail lobby. When a certain group's livelihood depends on a law they will wield disproportional influence because they will no choice but to spend a year's pay or more on a lobby(bribes).

    IIRC, today Bail Bondsmen don't actually lose the whole bail they post, only the 10% they already collected. Not sure about details, maybe they get certain time after you skip bail to nab you and not lose Bond amount.

    IMO ending most Bail and granting OR would free up jail space for actual sentences, rather that for people who just can't afford bail.

    Of course, for CA, its really just about the flood of new criminals overwhelming all jail and prison space.

    Leave a comment:


  • Condo Guard
    replied
    I remember a discussion here years ago about "special police" certifications in Washington, D.C. - essentially private security with academy training and full arrest powers.

    Mixing public and private duties carries risks. Privatization was all the rage in the U.S. and the U.K. for awhile, but it had very mixed results. Most of it was just a ploy to get around union rules or to try to streamline the bureaucracy. I have no problem with privatizing police support officers and the like, but LE duties should be left to the government.

    Rather than decriminalizing crime (which is essentially what eliminating bail does), governments should look at diversion programs or preventive measures (but that gets into social policy, and government never seems to be good at that).

    Leave a comment:


  • TOII
    replied
    Originally posted by Soper View Post
    Please post the states and agencies that are providing full law enforcement services via security guard companies. Not bases, labs, private communities, etc. Cities, towns.
    Who said they did entire cities and towns? I sure didn't. So please stop changing the goal posts. They are contract police agencies for hire,some work for transit agencies,universities,hospitals etc, and ARE fully certified Police officers with full academy training, with powers of arrest and marked police vehicles.

    Leave a comment:


  • Squid
    replied
    Originally posted by Soper View Post
    Please post the states and agencies that are providing full law enforcement services via security guard companies. Not bases, labs, private communities, etc. Cities, towns.
    You need to work on Reading Comprehension (and avoid signing any contracts without a trusted friend "helping" you LOL).

    He didn't say any "Cities, towns" had a private firm doing "full LES". He said "agencies" and IMO he means stuff like Rail Road Police.

    BTW, I'm not finding any confirmation of Modesto using private firm to do typical police duties, MPD wont return calls, a few Modesto firms say they don't know (but not sure if they are really Modesto). Will keep checking. But heard same basic story from TWO completely diff Modesto based guards I met at diff other firms.

    Leave a comment:


  • Squid
    replied
    Originally posted by Condo Guard View Post
    What it is about is governments understanding that with large tax cuts and corporate welfare, they won't have money in the future for new jails. Hence, you just let petty criminals cycle through the system, but don't house them. (Or, you can do what Seattle did and redefine which property crimes are felonies, and let citizens and businesses suffer the consequences.)

    Nobody cares about bail bondsmen - they aren't a large enough or powerful enough voting base to matter. And no, this is not an opportunity for private security - our industry can barely function well doing basic night watchman duties; trying to become social workers or parole officers is outside the wheelhouse of Securitas and others.
    worked on new Mule Creek State Prison, AKA Jerry Brown State University. Among interesting features are about 50+ft ceilings in cell blocks. Not where guards with guns look down but at the far end towards outside, for no reason other than maybe future indoor drone dog fights. You literally could not spend more money on a prison. Guards from existing side said new prison will require much more staffing due to design.

    Some upscale communities such as Oakland HILLS are hiring private security because cops can't or wont do the job. They have tried writing blank check after blank check to police Union for last 40yrs and all that happens is cops come up with more reasons not to do their job. IFAIK its been a great success, and amazingly cost effective. IIRC some residents of Alameda blame the program for pushing the hoods into their town. While Alameda is an island, IMO wouldn't lend itself as well to Community Security Patrol because its a grid w/retail, apts, etc VS few long winding streets with gated driveways.

    Big diff between Security and Police is Security can hire new people of any qualification and talent instantly with zero "transaction friction" whereas Police are pretty much stuck trying to "teach old dog new tricks" or more aptly "put lipstick on a pig". It took YEARS for Police Depts to get anyone who had a clue about any Computer Crime, and its still a joke. Sure Security tends to be a "job of last resort" and Warm Body is "lowest common denominator" but CAN still bring in "hired gun".

    Leave a comment:


  • Soper
    replied
    Please post the states and agencies that are providing full law enforcement services via security guard companies. Not bases, labs, private communities, etc. Cities, towns.

    Leave a comment:


  • TOII
    replied
    Originally posted by Condo Guard View Post
    What it is about is governments understanding that with large tax cuts and corporate welfare, they won't have money in the future for new jails. Hence, you just let petty criminals cycle through the system, but don't house them. (Or, you can do what Seattle did and redefine which property crimes are felonies, and let citizens and businesses suffer the consequences.)

    Nobody cares about bail bondsmen - they aren't a large enough or powerful enough voting base to matter. And no, this is not an opportunity for private security - our industry can barely function well doing basic night watchman duties; trying to become social workers or parole officers is outside the wheelhouse of Securitas and others.
    Actually in some states, securitas and allied barton or whatever they are now already run private police agencies. Add that to private corrections and I can see a market for private parole, Not that I think they should, just that they could. Security in California these days is generally all but pointless unfortunately.
    Last edited by TOII; 11-01-2018, 01:37 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Squid
    replied
    Originally posted by SoCalGuard View Post

    I don’t think any legal framework exists for what you are describing. California Penal Code is very strict on who is a peace officer and who has the authority of a peace officer. I have worked for some California security companies who have contracts with local police and sheriffs, but nothing in the law would allow for a non-peace officer to have general law enforcement authority. The contracts I have worked did involve dispatching us private security folks for non-law enforcement duties like prisoner transport, visual presence, and waiting by cars to get towed.
    That is what I thought when I heard, especially the traffic tickets and showing up in court for tickets. Worked with a guy that did Great America security and says the enforced traffic in parking lot but not sure how that worked.

    State park hired private security to patrol because no Rangers yet, but again only non-LEO powers.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kn9YdML8PPw&t=34s

    Then again, I've known guys who were arrested by Mall Cops OFF mall property at bus stop for smoking a joint, so I guess you could hire Security and direct them to a DV call and depending they could make an arrest.

    I'll try Modesto PD business phone(not expecting much), and maybe some Modesto or nearby Security during biz hours.

    I was kinda impressed with next door Ceres PD during my visit. Car got stolen, then returned direct from cops without big tow fee BS. And one Ceres PD got in trouble for filming up-skirt crotch shots of a civil female PD employee (NAACP involved), and another Ceres cop in trouble for a brutal kick to the groin of handcuffed home invasion suspect.

    Leave a comment:


  • SoCalGuard
    replied
    Originally posted by Squid View Post

    Modesto, CA ("American Graffiti") has a private security firm authorized by the police and sent to answer VD calls (and make arrests), crack skulls of bums at strip-malls, issue traffic tickets(speeding, etc) and show up in court just like cops for all those cases. I've know two guys who worked that gig. Sounds like "Lord of the Flies".

    IIRC some town in TX does similar.

    No idea what the "legal framework" is that lets city and PD unleash "the kids" on the public.
    I don’t think any legal framework exists for what you are describing. California Penal Code is very strict on who is a peace officer and who has the authority of a peace officer. I have worked for some California security companies who have contracts with local police and sheriffs, but nothing in the law would allow for a non-peace officer to have general law enforcement authority. The contracts I have worked did involve dispatching us private security folks for non-law enforcement duties like prisoner transport, visual presence, and waiting by cars to get towed.

    Leave a comment:


  • Squid
    replied
    Originally posted by Condo Guard View Post
    Couldn't find anything on TX either. Closest was a "town" back east that was originally a private community; they incorporated for tax reasons and essentially deputized their security d.
    I'll call MPD and maybe even local paper when I get a chance.

    I'm surprised the "story" hasn't gotten national attention, especially due to "American Graffiti" connection.
    Last edited by Squid; 10-24-2018, 11:58 PM.

    Leave a comment:

Leaderboard

Collapse
Working...
X