Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: *** UPDATED x1 *** Gaming bill can’t get out of House Executive Committee
Next Post: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Today’s edition of Capitol Fax (use all CAPS in password)
Posted in:
* The House approved an amended version of Mayor Rahm Emanuel’s anti-carjacking bill today…
Another interesting bill up for debate now: SB2339, which would crack down on carjackings and prevent "revolving door" of carjackers getting out of jail within 24 hours. It's basically a penalty enhancement. https://t.co/YGItlBGV2d
— Hannah Meisel (@hannahmeisel) May 28, 2018
.@AndradeRep40 tells his colleagues that the Senate already spoke 56-0 on the bill. Doesn’t have as easy a time in the House, though — 85 yes votes. pic.twitter.com/imQnx3H9y3
— Hannah Meisel (@hannahmeisel) May 28, 2018
Senate Bill 2339, despite fierce opposition from progressives and the Black Caucus, passes 85-29. Bill was a huge priority of @ChicagosMayor #twill https://t.co/ox8704QvBe
— Brenden Moore (@brendenmoore13) May 28, 2018
The bill now goes back to the Senate for concurrence.
* Mayor Emanuel’s response…
“We commend Representative Jaime Andrade and the Illinois House of Representatives for hearing the voices of victims and taking steps to create a culture of accountability for those involved in carjacking. Chicago needs our legislative and judicial partners to step up to the plate and hold offenders accountable, and we strongly urge the Illinois Senate to pass this bill without delay.”
…Adding… Tribune…
Also Monday, the House approved a revised proposal backed by Mayor Rahm Emanuel to crack down on people who commit carjackings.
The legislation is aimed at closing what the mayor’s office considers a loophole in existing law. Now, a person in possession of a vehicle has to know it has “been stolen or converted” in order to be charged with a felony. That’s often difficult to prove because people often claim they don’t know vehicles are stolen. As a result, many face a misdemeanor charge of trespassing.
The measure would allow officials to consider “surrounding facts and circumstances that would lead a reasonable person to believe that the vehicle or essential part is stolen or converted” when pursing charges. The idea is to have more accountability for those responsible for carjackings.
posted by Rich Miller
Monday, May 28, 18 @ 9:39 pm
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: *** UPDATED x1 *** Gaming bill can’t get out of House Executive Committee
Next Post: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Today’s edition of Capitol Fax (use all CAPS in password)
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
It was interesting this became a big issues. I don’t think there was a real chance it would not pass because lots of Republicans would support it, and no way would all the Democrats oppose the mayor.
Comment by Three Dimensional Checkers Monday, May 28, 18 @ 10:34 pm
Some of those Chicago Democrats who voted no are now persona non grata to Rahm?
Comment by Ravenswood Right Winger Tuesday, May 29, 18 @ 4:51 am
The remarks about impact about “black and brown” kids show some racism in certain white liberals.
Why does Cassidy think ” and brown” kids will get into more stolen cars than white kids? That they won’t care who owns the vehicle?
Reasonable minds can differ on the merits of the bill, but when she starts suggesting that somehow black or brown kids are less capable of making reasonable decisions than white kids, it raises some questions as to her (and others making the same argument) view of minority kids.
Comment by Gooner Tuesday, May 29, 18 @ 6:35 am
Gooner, what an amazingly wrong-headed take. It’s a recognition of the racism in our criminal justice system that results in greater surveillance of racial minorities, less bail, presumption of guilt, and more jail time.
You could’ve just said “Liberls r the real racists!!1″ and saved yourself a few words.
Comment by New Commenter Tuesday, May 29, 18 @ 6:49 am
New Commenter,
Unfortunately, racism is not limited to one side.
Further, your post fails to specify why this particular offense is likely to have a disproportionate impact.
Comment by Gooner Tuesday, May 29, 18 @ 8:48 am
**Why does Cassidy think ” and brown” kids will get into more stolen cars than white kids?**
Seriously? Its probably because Cassidy nows the data on juvenile arrests.
**when she starts suggesting that somehow black or brown kids are less capable of making reasonable decisions than white kids,**
You are the only one suggesting this.
Comment by SaulGoodman Tuesday, May 29, 18 @ 8:58 am
Saul,
“Data on juvenile arrests.”
So if one ethnic group commits a crime more often, we should make it legal?
Bank fraud is usually done by wealthy white males.
Are you suggesting bank fraud laws are racist?
Again, we need to ask why Kelly and others are convinced that certain people are more likely to commit certain crimes.
One last note — this is not like sentencing differences between crack and cocaine, where nearly identical acts are being treated differently based on the race of the people most likely to use a product.
This is about riding in stolen cars. Suggesting that a certain group needs to be protected because they are more likely to be in stolen cars is pretty offensive to that group.
At this time, I’ve made my point. Have a good day.
Comment by Gooner Tuesday, May 29, 18 @ 9:05 am
@Gooner–
It’s not that black or brown kids are more likely to be in a stolen car. It’s that black or brown kids are way more likely to be stopped by cops for driving a car that they “look like they shouldn’t be driving.”
Comment by Actual Red Tuesday, May 29, 18 @ 9:28 am
=It’s not that black or brown kids are more likely to be in a stolen car. =
I thought there was data kept on arrests and stops (?)
Is this all about the “kids will be kids” argument for lienency in carjackings. I consider myself fairly liberal, but this carjacking thing is serious stuff, it’s not cute by any standard.
Comment by Unecessarily Blocked Tuesday, May 29, 18 @ 10:57 am