The more the plans fail the more the planners plan!
2 Likes
No you not 
And I’m asserting that it most certainly does not. Since neither of us have a crystal ball, we can agree to disagree.
That’s not truth, that’s your opinion.
Incorrect. It’s intentionally designed to give criminals who commit non-violent crimes a second chance before basically professionally handicapping them for life by sending them to prison.
Why are you so convinced that the prescribed jail times are the correct ones?
As a thinking and honest person I can assure you that’s wrong since I don’t agree.
Do you think adultery should still be illegal?
Which has zero to do with Alvin Bragg’s policy to release criminals into the community, who have committed some very serious criminal offenses, without serving the prescribed jail time for such offenses.
Bragg’s insane policy will predictably create a new type of crime wave tailored to his policy ___ smash and grab, burglaries, armed robberies, especially in NYC’s subway system, etc. ___ and NYC’s hard-working citizen’s will pay the price for Bragg’s version of spreading the wealth by coddling criminals.
JWK
They are neither “liberals” or “progressives”. They are Socialist Revolutionaries, the very kind who took over Cuba and now rule over the people with an iron fist.
Bragg is talking about eliminating pre trial detention for certain offenses.
The idea that people who are up for trial for some non violent offenses get thrown in jail for an indefinite period of time is a bad thing to do should be a no brainer.
Big baloney!
The truth is, under Bragg’s new policy, some very serious crimes will now be charged as less serious crimes and the perps will get a slap on the wrist and be immediately returned to the community where statistics show they will continue their life of crime and inflict more pain and suffering on the hard-working citizens of NYC rather than doing time behind bars where they are away from decent members of the community.
The following offenses are now reduced as stated in Bragg’s policy:
a) An act that could be charged under PL §§ 160.15 (2, 3, or 4), 160.10(2b), or 160.05
that occurs in a commercial setting should be charged under PL § 155.25 if the force
or threat of force consists of displaying a dangerous instrument or similar behavior but
does not create a genuine risk of physical harm.
b) The possession of a non-firearm weapon under Penal Law § 265.02(1) shall not be
charged unless as a lesser included offense, and § 265.01 shall be charged instead.
c) Residential burglaries: An act involving theft of property from a storage area or other
portion of a dwelling that is not accessible to a living area that could be charged under
PL § 140.25(2) should be charged only under PL §140.20 and not under PL §140.30 or
PL §140.25(2).
d) Commercial burglaries: An act involving theft of property from a commercial
establishment that could be charged under PL § 140.25(2) because such establishment
is technically part of a larger structure that contains dwellings shall only be charged
under § 140.20.
e) Drug cases: If there is a reasonable view of the evidence indicating that a person
arrested for the sale of a controlled substance is acting as a low-level agent of a seller,
such person shall be charged with 220.03 and no felonies and therefore offered
diversion. Also, unless such charge is a lesser included offense or unless the defendant
actually sold a controlled substance, the offense of Penal Law § 220.06 shall not be
charged and 220.03 shall instead be charged.
In essence, an armed robber who now engages in First, Second and/or Third-degree Robbery, is to be charged with Petit larceny, given a DESK APPEARANCE TICKET, and be back on the streets in a few hours to repeat Armed Robbery.
Why must you make crap up and sugar-coat the new and insane Bragg policy?
JWK
The Democrat Party Leadership, once an advocate for hard working American citizens and their families, is now their most formidable domestic enemy.
You are reading it wrong.
The act of the robbery is still a class D felony… downgraded from a Class C. Still carries a 2 year minimum.
The act of being armed but not using the weapon in a way that would cause genuine physical harm is downgraded to a Class A Misdemeanor. That carries at least a year in jail
It is also downgrading the possession of a non firearm weapon from a class D felony to a class A misdemeanor.
All of these charges still carry with it potential jail time and the robbery would not be a desk appearance ticket since it is still a felony.
There would be a question as to whether there would be pre trial detention but that determination is made from several factors.
Stop with the baloney! From the actual policy:
a) An act that could be charged under PL §§ 160.15 (2, 3, or 4), 160.10(2b), or 160.05 that occurs in a commercial setting should be charged under PL § 155.25 if the force or threat of force consists of displaying a dangerous instrument or similar behavior but does not create a genuine risk of physical harm.
PL § 155.25 is Petit larceny and is a class A misdemeanor for which a Desk Appearance Ticket is issued, and the perp is out and about in a few hours.
Why must you make stuff up?
JWK
Correct.
But the act of the robbery itself is still a Class D felony.
That is a separate charge from possession of a weapon during the act.
You can’t have a possession of a weapon while committing a burglary without the charge of Burglary in the third degree which is still a felony.
Which will be charged under "PL § 155.25 [Petit Larceny] if the force or threat of force consists of displaying a dangerous instrument or similar behavior but does not create a genuine risk of physical harm." As such, the perp is issued a Desk Appearance Ticket and is back on the streets in a few hours.
JWK
But isn’t it saying the act of the robbery will be charged under the new guidelines?
No.
You posted the whole thing your self just a few posts ago.
There are separate charges for Residential Burglaries and Commercial Burglaries.
Those are still Felonies.
What you are referencing is the use of a weapon during a burglary being downgraded to a Claas A misdemeanor if the weapon never posed a credible threat.
You cannot have that charge without the Felony Burglary charge also.
So basically you don’t think DAT should be given nor bail and everyone should be held in jail until trial?
A burglary will still be charged as a class D felony.
And under Bragg’s new policy those felonies [PL §§ 160.15 (2, 3, or 4), 160.10(2b)] “should be charged under PL § 155.25 [Petit Larceny] if the force or threat of force consists of displaying a dangerous instrument or similar behavior but does not create a genuine risk of physical harm.”
JWK
I don’t know how many times I have to repeat it.
That is a separate charge from the Class D Felony Burglary.
You cannot charge someone with use of a weapon during a Burglary and not charge them with Burglary.
the left, as it is presently, is not an advocate for people defending their selves. At one time they may have been but I can’t remember that in my lifetime.
1 Like
That’s the right wing meme, but its not true. Among the left, opinions on gun rights cover the full gamut.
1 Like
They sure went balls to the wall in VA a couple years ago. I didn’t see any pushback from the left when that happened.
1 Like
I’m not sure what you mean by “balls to the wall” in regards to VA.
There are liberals who are into hunting. There are liberals that believe in owning a gun for self defense.
