RE: Measuring effects of policy changes. We are all very good at fitting explanations after the fact. Opinion columns are filled with such (e.g. from last December: "Electricity prices surged because of the federal government has been pushing renewable energy sources.") It's all spurious correlation masquerading as insight. If there is an increase in IL crime rates in 2024, I have no doubt that we will hear loud voices attributing it to cash bail without much or any digging into facts.
In science, it is important to declare a testing criteria before the data comes in. So, what stats should we declare now that we will use to decide if the cash bail system is doing harm? Overall crime rate is almost certainly driven by multiple factors which interact in complex ways, and is fairly volatile. I really don't know what good test would be. I do know that there are many people on both sides of the issue who are committed to a conclusion, and they will be able to find confirming evidence of what they want to think.
Most definitely. There are also thoughtful and well-meaning people who fall into this cognitive trap. For example, plenty of people who follow economics believe that "yield-curve inversion" is predictive of a recession because it has worked out that way for many decades. But there have not been very many recessions and there are are a whole lot of economic indicators one can look at. Some think that is more likely than not that yield-curve inversion is not at all predictive of recessions. I heard this few years ago before we are in the situation we are in now.
In fact, we all probably fall into the cognitive trap sometimes.
I have also seen nothing about what is expected on payments. Only 20% of bonds are returned. 70% is retained to pay court fees and costs and 10% goes to fines and restitution. Total bonds posted were over $120 million annually.
I just quickly perused the PS this am but have to say that when I read about the Musk "X" my first thought was about Russian tanks and equipment marked with an X. I've never belonged on that platform and am not going to sign up now. That guy is a ________.
Your point about getting a statistical sample of voters in Wisconsin only reinforces the reason to focus the polling in a few important states. If the polling sponsor wants to spend the money to get x viewpoints, they could ignore the irrelevant states and get higher sample sizes in the swing states. (and your math is wrong: 1.8% of 1000 is 18, not 180.)
For everyone concerned about the cashless bail system:
This past week two people jumped over the pharmacy counter at a Walgreen, smashed cases and made off with thousands of prescription pills. While being pursued by police, they drove in excess of 95mph on local streets in Lombard. They were only stopped when Oak Brook police laid down spike strips on the interstate. They recklessly endangered lives. Yet they were given bail of $50,000 and $100,000. Why were they given bail at all? A cashless bail system should determine if they are either a flight risk or a danger to the general population (which I submit their actions showed they were). Then they should be held regardless of how much money they might be able to come up with.
Hi Ken, You ask why were these suspects given bail. There are a lot of reasons. Cases take a long time to get through the system. People who are detained, and are presumed innocent, can sit in jail for months, or even a year or longer, before going to trial. And, both offenses here, aggravated fleeing and eluding, and non-residential burglary, are probationable. Even if both suspects are found guilty, depending on their backgrounds, the judge might sentence them to probation with a term in jail shorter than they might end up in jail waiting for trial if they were not given bail. The driver may not have known the other person was going to steal drugs from the Walgreens and freaked out when the other person came back with the drugs and told him to drive. Aggravated fleeing and eluding, of which the driver would be guilty, is a Class 4 felony. Most people get probation for their first Class 4 felony. Plus, although it appears that it is likely that police arrested the right people in this case, until trial, we don’t know that. That’s why pretrial release is generally what happens, except in very serious cases.
It's highly likely from the description of their outrageous actions that the dirt balls have a lengthy list of prior offenses. But, as with everything in the Cook County Injustice system, they probably were given a slap on the wrist and ask not to do bad things again before being cut loose back to the streets to find new victims.
First of all, the offenses occurred in DuPage County, not Cook County. And you really know nothing about the incident or the people involved other than what you read in the paper, if you did read a newspaper account, which information was provided by the police and prosecutors. The newspaper articles told nothing about the background of the people who were arrested. They are not “dirt balls.” They are people. As Charles Dickens would say, “fellow passengers to the grave, and not a strange race of creatures bound on other journeys.” I’m sure they are somebody’s children. They probably have a drug problem. I get so tired of the “othering” that appears to be the self-righteous default setting of so many people who call themselves “conservative.” One of the best judges I knew, the Hon. Paul W. Schnake of Kane County, used to hate sentencing people. Because, unlike so many self-styled “conservatives,” he could see the humanity in everyone who appeared before him. Schnake did what the law required. He didn’t give people what you call a “slap on the wrist.”
Thank you for your correction. I am happy they were arrested and charged in DuPage County where they will not receive the lenient Catch and Release treatment of Cook County prosecutor Kim Foxx.
I am sure they are someone's children because every human being is born from a biological mother, and so yes, that makes them members of the human race, same as Hitler, Pol Pot, Idi Amin and other dirtball people who do monstrous things. And if they have a drug problem, that may be part of their motivation for crimes, but it does not in any way excuse them.
You are right that everyone is constitutionally innocent until convicted in a court of law. But, if they did the things they are accused of, statistically it is overwhelmingly likely that they have lengthy records of similar prior crimes for which they were not adequately punished. And their conduct demonstrating a clear total disregard for the safety and lives of others does indeed place them in the category of human dirtballs who need to be removed from society for public safety.
What sect of Christianity is that? Does your Bible have the Jesus story where He is depicted as saying, “Let him who is without sin cast the first stone.” I have no problem with the law providing for certain punishments for people who commit offenses. But I never lose site of the fact that they are human beings. Even Donald Trump.
(Looking at my profile?? Don't you dare swipe right! 🫣) Thank you for personalizing the conversation and attempting to make it about me. Nonetheless, I'm happy to answer your question. I believe that everyone has the possibility of redemption. However, I also believe that people's bad actions can be criticized to whatever degree is appropriate with the corresponding punishment rendered. Hitler's actions made him a monster, and the actions attributed to these people do indeed make them dirt balls who have no regard for the safety and lives of others. I sincerely hope these young people repent of their sins and turn their lives around. However, that does not in any way excuse them from punishment. Statistically, the overwhelming majority of crimes are committed by repeat offenders with a lengthy list of offenses for which they have received a slap on the wrist. And that only allows them to commit more crimes and find new victims and we find ourselves in the public safety crisis that we are now in.
Like you, I'm tired of empty symbolism. In the 1950s and early 1960s, I attended Nicholas Copernicus Elementary School on the South Side. A few years ago, some do-gooders decided to rename it Anna Langford Academy after the first woman to serve on the Chicago City Council. I have yet to meet any Copernicus alumni refer to our old school by the new name, and probably never will.
It was a tough choice for me this week. I liked the Barbie tweet, and thought it was the most clever one, but for me it was a toss up between the NY-Chicago map and Five Guys. The former is not very funny but I found myself over-thinking it, and then I the fact that I was overthinking it was kind of funny. The five guys one is just my kind of humor.
I liked the Barbie tweet as well! And I really enjoyed the film. Perhaps Zorn would weigh in on Barbie, (um the film) sometime....suspect interesting comments on that ones as well. And speaking of interesting (and numerous) comments, have you read Neil Steinberg's post on EGDD about his trip to Aldi? Who knew the passion for Aldi that abounds!
The low number of votes for the Barbie tweet probably has less to do with a paucity of feminist philosophy amongst PS subscribers than it does with a reluctance to accede to whining, when there is actual wit and cleverness to be recognized elsewhere. That the author of that tweet managed to dig up a few 1 star reviews for a movie that has received almost universal praise is no mean achievement, but to use those reviews as a basis for some sort of claim of rampant misogyny among the film critic cognoscenti is rather lame, no?
As it happens, the Glenn Close tweet was actually the cleverest (although it could have been improved by not adding any text and allowing the visual pun to stand by itself), and yet the last I checked, it had even fewer votes than the Barbie tweet.
What do they say about liars and statistics? If you have 56% of all gun deaths last year were by suicide that says nothing about the percent of suicides that were by guns. It might be 100% or 1% or 86%. It is a lie to say (from that number) 44% of suicides are from non-firearm methods! That is lieing with statistics.
Allen correctly stated that your statistic was percentage of gun deaths that were suicides. But the next paragraph shows 55% of suicides were gun deaths. Just happened to both be within 1%
I have a bottle of foaming handsoap that provides detailed directions for washing hands, including rinsing afterwards in cool, running water. It also has a warning that This is Not Food -- Don't Eat It. No kidding.
I have an interesting story concerning hazing. It is my second year at college and a new guy comes on my floor as a transfer. His room is next to mine. We get to be friends and as time goes on we come to the time fraternities start recruiting folks. I am a scholarship ROTC student with no desire to join any fraternity. I ask him - interested in joining a frat?
He freaks out a bit and then relates this story. In his freshmen year he really wanted to join a frat. Went to the parties and then found one he really liked and “pledged”.
Come hell week he found himself in a line of other pledges naked and bent over in a compromising position. Suddenly he feels peanut butter being applied to his butt and genitals. At that moment he realized he could not debase himself any further. He raised up, ran out of the frat house naked, across the campus (snow on the ground) and back to his dorm. After several showers he decided to transfer and start a new life.
I asked him what he expected was going to happen after the peanut butter - he said I try not to think about it.
He smiled and said my self respect overcame my desire to be a frat guy. Once you lose your self respect it is really hard to get it back. And I realized that I was doing this to myself and that I could stop. I have never regretted my decision.
Seems like the NU football players all came to similar crossroads…but made a different decision.
I was completely stopped by the story of this man's hazing. It is an image that, in all the years I have been here, (and that's many), I have never encountered anything like it. I cannot help but think of the man who is applying the peanut butter. What level of self respect can he possibly have of himself?
I always tire of those who compare firearms to other items used to kill someone (knives, cars, crowbars, hammers, rope, etc.). The obvious difference is that virtually all firearms' only intended purpose is to end life (human, animal, etc.). Virtually all other items used to kill a human have other useful purposes. That other utility is their raison d'etre - and the reason why they are readily available for use without any (in virtually all circumstances) regulation. That they also can be used as weapons to kill is not their purpose for existing.
I chose the NYer's view of Chicago in this week's Visual Tweet (X).
RE: Measuring effects of policy changes. We are all very good at fitting explanations after the fact. Opinion columns are filled with such (e.g. from last December: "Electricity prices surged because of the federal government has been pushing renewable energy sources.") It's all spurious correlation masquerading as insight. If there is an increase in IL crime rates in 2024, I have no doubt that we will hear loud voices attributing it to cash bail without much or any digging into facts.
In science, it is important to declare a testing criteria before the data comes in. So, what stats should we declare now that we will use to decide if the cash bail system is doing harm? Overall crime rate is almost certainly driven by multiple factors which interact in complex ways, and is fairly volatile. I really don't know what good test would be. I do know that there are many people on both sides of the issue who are committed to a conclusion, and they will be able to find confirming evidence of what they want to think.
In a related topic, might want to re-check 1.8% of 1000... :)
Advocates and the media are also very good at using poorly defined terms and poor analytics.
Most definitely. There are also thoughtful and well-meaning people who fall into this cognitive trap. For example, plenty of people who follow economics believe that "yield-curve inversion" is predictive of a recession because it has worked out that way for many decades. But there have not been very many recessions and there are are a whole lot of economic indicators one can look at. Some think that is more likely than not that yield-curve inversion is not at all predictive of recessions. I heard this few years ago before we are in the situation we are in now.
In fact, we all probably fall into the cognitive trap sometimes.
https://www.civicfed.org/civic-federation/blog/quantifying-what-elimination-cash-bond-means-illinois
I have also seen nothing about what is expected on payments. Only 20% of bonds are returned. 70% is retained to pay court fees and costs and 10% goes to fines and restitution. Total bonds posted were over $120 million annually.
I just quickly perused the PS this am but have to say that when I read about the Musk "X" my first thought was about Russian tanks and equipment marked with an X. I've never belonged on that platform and am not going to sign up now. That guy is a ________.
I agree about Musk being a _____. Have deleted Twitter app. It’s a matter of integrity and supporting only companies whose leaders I respect.
For example…?
The Russian military vehicles, etc. are marked with "Z". A bigger concern is why so many of my journalist friends follow "Twitter".
Your point about getting a statistical sample of voters in Wisconsin only reinforces the reason to focus the polling in a few important states. If the polling sponsor wants to spend the money to get x viewpoints, they could ignore the irrelevant states and get higher sample sizes in the swing states. (and your math is wrong: 1.8% of 1000 is 18, not 180.)
That was a bad math error on my part. And yes, so the margin of error is 23%; utterly useless.)
For everyone concerned about the cashless bail system:
This past week two people jumped over the pharmacy counter at a Walgreen, smashed cases and made off with thousands of prescription pills. While being pursued by police, they drove in excess of 95mph on local streets in Lombard. They were only stopped when Oak Brook police laid down spike strips on the interstate. They recklessly endangered lives. Yet they were given bail of $50,000 and $100,000. Why were they given bail at all? A cashless bail system should determine if they are either a flight risk or a danger to the general population (which I submit their actions showed they were). Then they should be held regardless of how much money they might be able to come up with.
Hi Ken, You ask why were these suspects given bail. There are a lot of reasons. Cases take a long time to get through the system. People who are detained, and are presumed innocent, can sit in jail for months, or even a year or longer, before going to trial. And, both offenses here, aggravated fleeing and eluding, and non-residential burglary, are probationable. Even if both suspects are found guilty, depending on their backgrounds, the judge might sentence them to probation with a term in jail shorter than they might end up in jail waiting for trial if they were not given bail. The driver may not have known the other person was going to steal drugs from the Walgreens and freaked out when the other person came back with the drugs and told him to drive. Aggravated fleeing and eluding, of which the driver would be guilty, is a Class 4 felony. Most people get probation for their first Class 4 felony. Plus, although it appears that it is likely that police arrested the right people in this case, until trial, we don’t know that. That’s why pretrial release is generally what happens, except in very serious cases.
It's highly likely from the description of their outrageous actions that the dirt balls have a lengthy list of prior offenses. But, as with everything in the Cook County Injustice system, they probably were given a slap on the wrist and ask not to do bad things again before being cut loose back to the streets to find new victims.
First of all, the offenses occurred in DuPage County, not Cook County. And you really know nothing about the incident or the people involved other than what you read in the paper, if you did read a newspaper account, which information was provided by the police and prosecutors. The newspaper articles told nothing about the background of the people who were arrested. They are not “dirt balls.” They are people. As Charles Dickens would say, “fellow passengers to the grave, and not a strange race of creatures bound on other journeys.” I’m sure they are somebody’s children. They probably have a drug problem. I get so tired of the “othering” that appears to be the self-righteous default setting of so many people who call themselves “conservative.” One of the best judges I knew, the Hon. Paul W. Schnake of Kane County, used to hate sentencing people. Because, unlike so many self-styled “conservatives,” he could see the humanity in everyone who appeared before him. Schnake did what the law required. He didn’t give people what you call a “slap on the wrist.”
Thank you for your correction. I am happy they were arrested and charged in DuPage County where they will not receive the lenient Catch and Release treatment of Cook County prosecutor Kim Foxx.
I am sure they are someone's children because every human being is born from a biological mother, and so yes, that makes them members of the human race, same as Hitler, Pol Pot, Idi Amin and other dirtball people who do monstrous things. And if they have a drug problem, that may be part of their motivation for crimes, but it does not in any way excuse them.
You are right that everyone is constitutionally innocent until convicted in a court of law. But, if they did the things they are accused of, statistically it is overwhelmingly likely that they have lengthy records of similar prior crimes for which they were not adequately punished. And their conduct demonstrating a clear total disregard for the safety and lives of others does indeed place them in the category of human dirtballs who need to be removed from society for public safety.
I looked at your profile. It says you are a “Christian conservative.” Does your religion teach you that some people are “dirt balls”?
What sect of Christianity is that? Does your Bible have the Jesus story where He is depicted as saying, “Let him who is without sin cast the first stone.” I have no problem with the law providing for certain punishments for people who commit offenses. But I never lose site of the fact that they are human beings. Even Donald Trump.
(Looking at my profile?? Don't you dare swipe right! 🫣) Thank you for personalizing the conversation and attempting to make it about me. Nonetheless, I'm happy to answer your question. I believe that everyone has the possibility of redemption. However, I also believe that people's bad actions can be criticized to whatever degree is appropriate with the corresponding punishment rendered. Hitler's actions made him a monster, and the actions attributed to these people do indeed make them dirt balls who have no regard for the safety and lives of others. I sincerely hope these young people repent of their sins and turn their lives around. However, that does not in any way excuse them from punishment. Statistically, the overwhelming majority of crimes are committed by repeat offenders with a lengthy list of offenses for which they have received a slap on the wrist. And that only allows them to commit more crimes and find new victims and we find ourselves in the public safety crisis that we are now in.
Here's your big opportunity to rename the Picayune Sentinel as Z.
Re: X will always be Twitter to me.
Like you, I'm tired of empty symbolism. In the 1950s and early 1960s, I attended Nicholas Copernicus Elementary School on the South Side. A few years ago, some do-gooders decided to rename it Anna Langford Academy after the first woman to serve on the Chicago City Council. I have yet to meet any Copernicus alumni refer to our old school by the new name, and probably never will.
Must not be many feminists among your readers, given the low numbers who chose the Barbie visual tweet. I thought it was hilarious!
It was a tough choice for me this week. I liked the Barbie tweet, and thought it was the most clever one, but for me it was a toss up between the NY-Chicago map and Five Guys. The former is not very funny but I found myself over-thinking it, and then I the fact that I was overthinking it was kind of funny. The five guys one is just my kind of humor.
I liked the Barbie tweet as well! And I really enjoyed the film. Perhaps Zorn would weigh in on Barbie, (um the film) sometime....suspect interesting comments on that ones as well. And speaking of interesting (and numerous) comments, have you read Neil Steinberg's post on EGDD about his trip to Aldi? Who knew the passion for Aldi that abounds!
I voted for the Barbie tweet.
The low number of votes for the Barbie tweet probably has less to do with a paucity of feminist philosophy amongst PS subscribers than it does with a reluctance to accede to whining, when there is actual wit and cleverness to be recognized elsewhere. That the author of that tweet managed to dig up a few 1 star reviews for a movie that has received almost universal praise is no mean achievement, but to use those reviews as a basis for some sort of claim of rampant misogyny among the film critic cognoscenti is rather lame, no?
As it happens, the Glenn Close tweet was actually the cleverest (although it could have been improved by not adding any text and allowing the visual pun to stand by itself), and yet the last I checked, it had even fewer votes than the Barbie tweet.
What do they say about liars and statistics? If you have 56% of all gun deaths last year were by suicide that says nothing about the percent of suicides that were by guns. It might be 100% or 1% or 86%. It is a lie to say (from that number) 44% of suicides are from non-firearm methods! That is lieing with statistics.
I didn't catch that and will pursue it in a later edition.
Yeah, I caught that, but found the actual number was 55%, so tried to avoid long explanation.
“More than half of all suicides in 2021 – 26,328 out of 48,183, or 55%.”
OK, so what's the link and what's the clarification needed?
https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/04/26/what-the-data-says-about-gun-deaths-in-the-u-s/
Allen correctly stated that your statistic was percentage of gun deaths that were suicides. But the next paragraph shows 55% of suicides were gun deaths. Just happened to both be within 1%
Rick W would appreciate not having multiple grammatical errors edited into his quoted comments.
Sorry about that typo. In haste to clarify and condense letters it happens.
What are the chances that the washing -instructions tag was digitally altered for yuks?
Hard to tell sometimes given the fakery that's possible. But in this case it seems as though the label is real, yet intended as a joke from the clothing company https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/26532/is-this-remove-child-before-washing-clothes-label-real. If it wins, which it seems like it may, I will issue a ruling.
I have a bottle of foaming handsoap that provides detailed directions for washing hands, including rinsing afterwards in cool, running water. It also has a warning that This is Not Food -- Don't Eat It. No kidding.
Reminds me of the Brian Regan bit about instructions on the box of pop tarts. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8kThoZpF_U
I am waiting with baited breath to see if the promised $120 rate is real.
I have an interesting story concerning hazing. It is my second year at college and a new guy comes on my floor as a transfer. His room is next to mine. We get to be friends and as time goes on we come to the time fraternities start recruiting folks. I am a scholarship ROTC student with no desire to join any fraternity. I ask him - interested in joining a frat?
He freaks out a bit and then relates this story. In his freshmen year he really wanted to join a frat. Went to the parties and then found one he really liked and “pledged”.
Come hell week he found himself in a line of other pledges naked and bent over in a compromising position. Suddenly he feels peanut butter being applied to his butt and genitals. At that moment he realized he could not debase himself any further. He raised up, ran out of the frat house naked, across the campus (snow on the ground) and back to his dorm. After several showers he decided to transfer and start a new life.
I asked him what he expected was going to happen after the peanut butter - he said I try not to think about it.
He smiled and said my self respect overcame my desire to be a frat guy. Once you lose your self respect it is really hard to get it back. And I realized that I was doing this to myself and that I could stop. I have never regretted my decision.
Seems like the NU football players all came to similar crossroads…but made a different decision.
I was completely stopped by the story of this man's hazing. It is an image that, in all the years I have been here, (and that's many), I have never encountered anything like it. I cannot help but think of the man who is applying the peanut butter. What level of self respect can he possibly have of himself?
There are guys who weren't born in 1991 who call the golf course "Waveland".
When does TV news cease to be breaking? A day? A week? A month?
I always tire of those who compare firearms to other items used to kill someone (knives, cars, crowbars, hammers, rope, etc.). The obvious difference is that virtually all firearms' only intended purpose is to end life (human, animal, etc.). Virtually all other items used to kill a human have other useful purposes. That other utility is their raison d'etre - and the reason why they are readily available for use without any (in virtually all circumstances) regulation. That they also can be used as weapons to kill is not their purpose for existing.
I chose the NYer's view of Chicago in this week's Visual Tweet (X).
Actually, a primary use of firearms is to defend human lives. A purpose to which they are employed on a daily basis.
And they do that by ending (or trying to end) a life.
Yeah! A sister!