Feral Jundi

Thursday, April 28, 2011

Call To Action: Colorado Senate Bill 11-186 Will Free Criminals And Spell The End Of Private Bail-Vote No!

Filed under: Bounties,Call To Action,Colorado — Tags: , , , , , , , — Matt @ 10:28 PM

In the past I have written about the effectiveness of offense industries, and specifically bounty hunting.  The strength of the private bail industry comes from the profit motive of the act and from them having incentive to get their bail money back if their client runs, and that is a good thing. These men and women work hard in this industry and earn every penny they make doing a dangerous service that benefits us all.

What Colorado is trying to do here is to ruin private enterprise, and expand the size of government through another means of capturing revenue. Meanwhile, if the bail industry is destroyed by this greedy government program, who will run after the criminals that run? The police? Hell, they can’t even keep up with the current warrants in that state.

At the bottom of these articles I posted the contact information for all the state Senators in Colorado. Take your pick, or write them all, but either way, tell them to vote no on Senate Bill 11-186.  –Matt

Dog The Bounty Hunter Fighting Bill That Would Free Criminals
Apr 26, 2011
Duane “Dog” Chapman isn’t just busy yanking criminals off the street — he’s fighting the politicians trying to put them back on the street!
Dog is leading the fight in Colorado against a state Senate bill he and the bill’s critics say will put bail bondsmen out of business — and flood society with criminals.
“This time I’m not barking. I’m here to take a real bite out of crime,” Dog told RadarOnline from Colorado. “I’m here to stop tax funded bonds ?and return bail bonds to the private sector where it belongs.”
Authorities in Colorado on Tuesday will convene to vote on the divisive Senate Bill 11-186,  sponsored by Democratic Sen. John Morse and Republican Rep. Mark Waller, both of Colorado Springs.
The bill would put into play a deposit bond, which would grant pre-trial services to offer bonds to incarcerated defendants.
Here’s how it works:
If the accused cannot can’t get bonded out by a private bail company, the court will make one available to them.  Once the judge sets bond, the defendant would be able to pay up to 15 percent of the amount.
Under this system, 50 percent of the revenue would go to the court fees for the service. If the defendant is found not guilty, the other 50 percent would be returned to them. If they are found guilty, whatever funds are left would be given back to them.
One former lawman who operates his bail bonds company out of Colorado Springs, told KRDO -TV that if the bill is passed into a law, hundreds of people in his industry will be out of work.
Not only that, but who is going to chase down the criminals who don’t show up to court. Dog the Bounty Hunter told RadarOnline.com: “This state has hundreds of thousands of warrants! no Bounty Hunters ?  Ha, not,” he scoffed in a warning. (more…)

Thursday, April 7, 2011

Bounties: The US Congress Paid $100 Per British Prisoner Captured During War Of 1812

Filed under: Bounties,History,Letter Of Marque — Tags: , , , , , — Matt @ 3:57 PM

1814, March 19. The $25 for each prisoner captured by private armed vessels of the United States to be $100 hereafter. $200,000 appropriated.
(What cost $100 in 1814 would cost $1025.20 in 2010.)

Now this is interesting, and I found this nugget of information in the Spirit of 76, Volume 6 edition. Did you know that the US Congress authorized a bounty system for British Prisoners during the War of 1812?  Apparently back then, the British had captured a ton of American prisoners during that war. The reason for that was because there were hundreds of American privateers involved in the war that went after the enemy, and many of these privateers were captured during operations.  These privateers were not as experienced and as professionalized as the Royal Navy back then, and suffered the consequence of being ill prepared.

Another problem that popped up in the war was that many of these American privateers had no use for prisoners and often let them go.  So in 1814, that is when Congress decided to appropriate money for bounties for privateers to hang on to prisoners and turn them in to US detention. My guess is that Congress wanted to do prisoner exchanges to get all of these Americans freed from British prisons. So naturally, Congress created an industry out of capturing prisoners to solve the problem. That is on top of the prize capture system implemented by Congress, which was an industry created to destroy enemy logistics and infuse money into the US Treasury.

With that said, privateers did some damage during that war and were a very important part of the overall strategy.  Despite the risks and poor conditions, many guys were driven to join the privateer schooners in the hopes of capturing a prize (or enemy vessel).  I compare it to today’s crab fishermen in Alaska, and a good visual representation of that ‘risk versus reward’ mindset is to watch a show like the ‘Deadliest Catch‘. It is the allure of the hunt and of striking it rich, that drove these men to do what they did back then.  Plus it was the patriotic thing to do at the time, and privateering was very popular.

Another little nugget I found out recently, was the concept of Prize Tickets.  What these were, were contracts between the sailors and the privateer company in which that sailor would get his share of the prize, after all the proceedings of the prize court and after everyone was paid.  The interesting thing here is that guys didn’t know how much they would get for their efforts, and it required patience to wait for the final outcome. What happened with many privateers is that instead of waiting, they would instead sell their prize tickets to brokers who would pay a small fee.  These brokers would stand to make a killing, just because they were rich enough and patient enough to wait for the final outcome of the prize.

The other thing that I thought was interesting is that privateer and letter of marque were two types of vessels/enterprises during that war. Not only was a Letter of Marque a commission/license issued to privateers, but the name Letter of Marque was given to a certain type of enterprise/vessel in this war. A Letter of Marque was a cargo vessel whom was issued a LoM for the possible chance that they might come across an enemy vessel and make a capture. But their primary task was shipping their cargo.  A privateer was a vessel that was primarily a fighting vessel, and prize captures/commerce raiding was is it’s purpose.

For more information on the War of 1812, I highly suggest a new book that came out called the Perilous Fight: America’s Intrepid War With Great Britain On the High Sea’s 1812-1815, By Stephen Budiansky. And I really liked this quote from the product description of this book: “Never again would the great powers challenge the young republic’s sovereignty in the aftermath of the stunning performance of America’s navy and privateersmen in sea battles that ranged across half the globe. Their brilliant hit-and-run tactics against a far mightier foe would pioneer concepts of “asymmetric warfare” that would characterize the insurgency warfare of later centuries.” Pretty cool. –Matt

ACTION FOR THE BENEFIT OF REVOLUTIONARY SOLDIERS.
COMPILED FROM THE MINUTES OF CONGRESS
The Spirit of ’76, Volume 6
1812, Jan. 18. Act declaring war with Great Britain.
1812, June 26. Act concerning letters of marque, prizes and and prize goods. The 17th section says: “That two percentum on the net amount (after deducting all charges and expenditures) of the prize money arising from capture of vessels and cargoes, recaptured by the private armed vessels of the United States, shall be secured and paid over to the collector or other chief officer of the customs at the port or place in the United States at which such captured or recaptured vessels may arrive; or consul or other public agent of the United States residing at the port or place not within the United States, at which such captured or recaptured vessels may arrive. And the moneys arising therefrom shall be held, and is hereby pledged by the government of the United States as a fund for the support and maintenance of the widows and children of such persons as may be slain; and for the support and maintenance of such persons as may be wounded and disabled, on board of thte private armed vessels of the United States, in any engagement with the enemy, to be assigned and distributed in such manner as shall hereafter by law be provided.” ) (more…)

Wednesday, March 30, 2011

Bounties: US Offers $5 Million In Killing Of ICE Agent, Mexico Offers 10 Million Pesos

Filed under: Bounties,Law Enforcement,Mexico — Tags: , , , , , , — Matt @ 10:15 PM

The Mexican government offered up a reward of 10 million Pesos for this deal as well, and obviously the case is going cold and they need some information to catch these guys. Hopefully this bounty will do the trick. –Matt

U.S. offers $5 million in killing of ICE agent
Two ambushed along highway, likely by a Mexican drug cartel
By Jerry Seper
March 30, 2011
The Departments of Justice, State and Homeland Security announced Wednesday a reward of up to $5 million for information leading to the arrest and conviction of the Mexican gunmen who shot and killed U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Special Agent Jaime Zapata and wounded his partner, Victor Avila Jr. (more…)

Wednesday, February 9, 2011

Fish And Game: North Dakota Takes Aim With Bounty On Coyotes

Filed under: Bounties,Fish and Game,North Dakota — Tags: , , , , , , — Matt @ 11:35 AM

     The number of complaints USDA Wildlife Services receives from livestock producers confirms the coyote abundance.      According to Phil Mastrangelo, director of USDA Wildlife Services in North Dakota, coyote complaints increased from 374 in 2007 to 498 last year. He said Wildlife Services has nine wildlife-control experts across the state, and coyotes account for the bulk of their workload.

     “These guys work a large area, a minimum of five counties apiece, and they’re stretched pretty thin,” he said.

    I guess the Senate Bill for this was shot down.  But the House Bill is still in play and I think something like this would be a fantastic idea.

    First, lets look at the opponent’s view on this.  Of course the North Dakota Game and Fish Department would be opposed to a bounty program because it would threaten their good deals. Meaning if a bounty program succeeds, then why fund inefficient programs in the NDGFD?  I compare this to the TSA and their opposition to private industry taking over their airport screening services.(notice how the TSA shot private industry down as well)  This is government versus private industry, or in this case, government versus private hunters.

     But if you read the quote above, they are only using nine USDA government hunters to cover 5 counties apiece! How can they possible put a dent in the coyote population there?  Let alone, if these guys are being paid by the feds, they are probably getting health care and everything else that government jobs entail.  Or they could be contractor hunters–who knows? What I do know is that the state must scale up the hunting of this animal if it want’s to reduce it’s numbers, and it is not enough to just depend upon the whims of recreational hunters to do the job or nine government hunters.

    I think a bounty program would work just fine, and it would be a way for the state to spread the work load and incentivize the process. It would also infuse money back into the local communities where jobs are scarce. Hell, if a hunter was able to bag three coyotes in a day, that would be 300 dollars. Not bad for a day’s work?

     If you want professional hunters to really get involved with the eradication of these animals, you need to make killing coyotes a viable occupation for them.  Hunters pay for their gun, bullets, a tank of gas, food, and maybe even lodging to go out and hunt recreationally. But there is no way a recreational hunter will be driven to expend this much time and treasure to continually do this, unless they have another profession or trust fund that can support this lifestyle. (and some do out there) Hell, I have to really plan and budget to make an effort to go out hunting once or twice a year.

    But if you want to ramp up interest in the task, then it must be incentivized and there must be good rules and management of the process in order for it to be effective. The end result of such an effort will be the desired outcome.  Hell, if commercialized hunting almost decimated the buffalo back in the wild west days, a coyote bounty system could equally be successful.

     Or we can continue to depend upon an inefficient and undermanned government system to do the job–and meanwhile the coyote problem continues to rise and threaten livestock and deer populations. –Matt

North Dakota takes aim with bounty on coyotes

Feb. 09, 2011

By BRAD DOKKEN

Not a day goes by, Gerald Berthold says, when he doesn’t hear coyotes howling nearby on his farm west of Arvilla, N.D.

“You can be out in the evening, and you can hear them just about in every direction howling,” Berthold said.

Coyotes have killed at least two of his calves in recent years, Berthold said. And last summer, he said two calves simply disappeared from a pasture near Emerado, N.D.

Berthold can’t say for sure it was coyotes, but he has his suspicions.

“I don’t know where else they would have went,” he said. “They were too young to take off on their own. They were still nursing. They were month-old calves.”

Coyotes have become an increasingly hot topic in North Dakota in recent years. As the population grows, so, too, have the reports of coyotes causing problems. Berthold said the increase in coyote numbers has been especially apparent the past 10 to 15 years.

“They’re definitely on the increase,” he said. “There’s no doubt about that.”

Prompted largely by hunters who believe coyotes are hurting deer populations, a couple of bills have surfaced this winter in the North Dakota Legislature taking aim at reducing coyote numbers. House Bill 1454 and Senate Bill 2224 each would establish a $100 bounty on coyotes until 2,000 are taken.

Legislators haven’t yet acted on the bills.

(more…)

Wednesday, January 12, 2011

Bounties: The Bounty Hunter’s Pursuit Of Justice

Filed under: Bounties,Law Enforcement,Letter Of Marque — Tags: , , , , , , — Matt @ 10:23 AM

     Our research backs up what I found on the street: Bail bondsmen and bounty hunters get their charges to show up for trial, and they recapture them quickly when they do flee. Nationally, the failure-to-appear rate for defendants released on commercial bail is 28 percent lower than the rate for defendants released on their own recognizance, and 18 percent lower than the rate for those released on government bond.

     Even more important, when a defendant does skip town, the bounty hunters are the ones who pursue justice with the greatest determination and energy. Defendants sought by bounty hunters are a whopping 50 percent less likely to be on the loose after one year than other bail jumpers. 

    The results of the Manhattan Bail Project seemed to support the position of progressives who argued that commercial bail was unnecessary. But all that the findings really demonstrated was that a few carefully selected felony defendants could be safely released on their own recognizance. In reality, the project allowed relatively few defendants to be let go and so could easily cherry pick those who were most likely to appear at trial. As pretrial release programs expanded in the late 1960s and early ’70s, failure-to-appear rates increased.

     Today, when a defendant fails to appear, an arrest warrant is issued. But if the defendant was released on his own recognizance or on government bail, very little else happens. In many states and cities, the police are overwhelmed with outstanding arrest warrants. In California, about two million warrants have gone unserved. Many are for minor offenses, but hundreds of thousands are for felonies, including thousands of homicides. 

     Excellent little article, and I also posted the author’s paper in Scribd. What fascinates me about bounty hunting/commercial bail is that it is an incentivized system of fugitive recovery that works.  It has all the elements needed to survive and flourish, all with the focus on capturing bad guys. This system also rewards those that are good at it.

     To study this type of incentivized crime fighting helps me to envision the various types of incentivized war fighting that I have mentioned in the past–like privateering. Creating an industry out of destroying your enemies, or creating an industry out of capturing your criminals can be very effective.

     The other part of this paper that I liked is how it showed through statistics why states or cities that do not allow bounty hunting/commercial bail are using systems that suck.  That arrest warrants are piling up in these states and cities because they are too afraid of allowing private industry to take part in their justice systems. Meanwhile, the states and cities that do allow this type of activity are able to benefit in two ways.  Keeping control of fugitives, or benefiting from the forfeiture of that fugitive’s bond. During a tough economy, this forfeiture could be funding all sorts of public services or schools. Interesting stuff and be sure to check out the paper too. –Matt

The Bounty Hunter’s Pursuit of Justice

by Alex Tabarrok

Winter 2011

When felony defendants jump bail, bounty hunters spring into action. It’s a uniquely American system, and it works.

Andrew Luster had it all: a multimillion-dollar trust fund, good looks, and a bachelor pad just off the beach in Mussel Shoals, California. Luster, the great-grandson of cosmetics legend Max Factor, spent his days surfing and his nights cruising the clubs. His life would have been sad but unremarkable if he had not had a fetish for sex with unconscious women. When one woman alleged rape, Luster claimed mutual consent, but the videotapes the police discovered when they searched his home told a different story. Eventually, more than 10 women came forward, and he was convicted of 20 counts of rape and sentenced to 124 years in prison. There was only one problem. Luster could not be found.

Shortly before he was expected to take the stand, Luster withdrew funds from his brokerage accounts, found a caretaker for his dog, and skipped town on a $1 million bail bond. The FBI put Luster on its most-wanted list, but months passed with no results. In the end, the authorities did not find him. But Luster was brought to justice—by a dog (or at least a man who goes by that name). Duane Chapman, star of the A&E reality TV show Dog: The Bounty Hunter, tracked Luster for months. He picked up clues to Luster’s whereabouts from old phone bills and from Luster’s mother, who inadvertently revealed that her son spoke fluent Spanish. He also gleaned useful information from a mysterious Mr. X who taunted him by e-mail and who may have been Luster himself. Finally, a tip from someone who had seen Dog on television brought Chapman to a small town in Mexico known for its great surfing. Days later, he and his team spotted Luster at a taco stand, apprehended him, and turned him over to the local police.

Go to this link here to read the rest.

« Newer Posts — Older Posts »

Powered by WordPress