That’s what they do . . . bait and switch, obfuscate, deflect, exaggerate, instigate, and use any other tactic to avoid a productive discussion.
JWK
They are not “liberals” or “progressives”. They are Socialist Revolutionaries, the very kind who took over Cuba and now rule over the people with an iron fist.
Guess my interpretation of the memo was wrong. Despite that, its still too soon to see if his policies will make Manhattan less safe unless you have evidence that Rolon robbed the drug store because of the memo.
Says the one who advocates : “From each according to their ability to pay, to each who needs help living a decent life.” ___ fallenturtle
You fit right in with Alvin Bragg’s crowd who is using his power to spread the wealth from those who have worked to earned it to those who steal it.
JWK
They are not “liberals” or “progressives”. They are Socialist Revolutionaries, the very kind who took over Cuba and now rule over the people with an iron fist.
Supposedly, but based on this arrest of this Rolon dude I’m fairly off the mark on what the memo is advising. The way I read it this guy shouldn’t have had his sentence downgraded.
That’s what I’ve been trying to have someone, anyone answer. If criminals can be charged with a felony robbery, what’s the freakin point in downgrading the weapons charge? That makes no sense… the only way that make sense is if the robbery and weapons charge are both being downgraded… if the goal is to not saddle someone with a felony charge.
Actually I’ve revised this… its now “Let’s make Friday part of the weekend and give every new baby a chocolate eclair.” I expect you to use this updated version from hence forth.
Yea, my original interpretation was that if someone did a robbery and the weapon posed no actual threat (like its a fake gun or isn’t loaded) and the stolen items were less than a $1000 that the weapon charge would be downgraded to keep it a misdemeanor… but this was more than $1k, so that proves me wrong. Also the fact that this guy is a repeat offender makes me surprised he was released on bail.
My understanding is that these guidelines are still much in flux and open to discussion, so we’ll just have to see where it goes. I am anti cash bail and I do think we need alternatives to incarceration for first time offenders, but this guy based on what I’ve read doesn’t fall into this category.
And? “The New York Post was established on November 16, 1801, as the New-York Evening Post. No other USA daily newspaper still in operation is older. Alexander Hamilton founded the Post in 1801”.
Why do you find it necessary to deflect rather than respond to what I posted?
So, once again you deflect rather than respond to what is posted. Considering you are fully aware of the actual Bragg memo, which you POSTED A LINK TO and confirms what was written in the New York Post, it is obvious your comment “You’re quoting the NYPost”., is nothing more than a deflection as you have not shown it to be inconsistent with the actual Bragg policy memo.
The following offenses shall be charged as follows:
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.
JWK
The Democrat Party Leadership, once an advocate for hard working American citizens and their families, is now their worst nightmare.
You’re breaking your mic for no reason what so ever.
I said, “Supposedly, but based on this arrest of this Rolon dude I’m fairly off the mark on what the memo is advising. The way I read it this guy shouldn’t have had his sentence downgraded.” and you replied with an ad hom for reasons unknown to me.
Let me break this down for you:
The NYPost has a strong conservative bias and therefore its interpretation of the memo is invalid in my opinion.
I admit that my interpretation of the memo is wrong by proof of this Rolon case.
I don’t agree with your opinion of what the results of this new policy will be on crime in NYC.
The New York Post summarized Bragg’s new policy as follows:
Armed robbers who use guns or other deadly weapons to stick up stores and other businesses will be prosecuted only for petty larceny, a misdemeanor, provided no victims were seriously injured and there’s no “genuine risk of physical harm” to anyone. Armed robbery, a class B felony, would typically be punishable by a maximum of 25 years in prison, while petty larceny subjects offenders to up to 364 days in jail and a $1,000 fine.
Convicted criminals caught with weapons other than guns will have those felony charges downgraded to misdemeanors unless they’re also charged with more serious offenses. Criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, a class D felony, is punishable by up to 7 years behind bars.
Burglars who steal from residential storage areas, parts of homes that aren’t “accessible to a living area” and businesses located in mixed-use buildings will be prosecuted for a low-level class D felony that only covers break-ins instead of for more serious crimes. Those more serious crimes, class B and class C felonies, would be punishable by up to 25 and up to 15 years in prison respectively.
Drug dealers believed to be “acting as a low-level agent of a seller” will be prosecuted only for misdemeanor possession. Also, suspected dealers will only be prosecuted on felony charges if they’re also accused of more serious crimes or are actually caught in the act of selling drugs. That felony would mean facing up to seven years behind bars.
What specifically in the above summary is “invalid” as you have asserted?
JWK
The Democrat Party Leadership, once an advocate for hard working American citizens and their families, is now their most formidable domestic enemy.
