Bail reform and online betting

Explaining why judges impose bail

A reader seems to have a blanket opposition to cash bail as being "against a person’s rights" because the person is "presumed innocent" ["Different reactions to bail reform essay," Letters, Feb. 7].

She may have her heart in the right place but doesn’t seem to understand the legitimate purpose for it in the criminal justice system, which is to ensure that the person charged will return to court after arraignment.

In deciding whether to impose cash bail and the amount, a judge, after being provided relevant information, must weigh factors, such as the crime charged, the sentence that may be imposed, whether the person has a criminal record, and the extent of community ties.

Then, a judge can have a good idea whether the person is a flight risk and of the necessity of substantial bail. The purpose is not to punish one for being poor.

— Jay Abrahams, Lynbrook

When does online betting craze end?

Another pandemic is going on in this country, and it’s online sports gambling ["Online gamblers can’t afford to lose money," Letters, Feb. 1].

Since the legalization of online gaming sites, it seems every other TV commercial during a sporting event is about gambling. In January, during the first weekend of legalized online gambling in New York, more than 650,000 accounts were created and $150 million wagered. In all of January, $1.6 billion was wagered. Announcers are constantly shilling for gambling sites, giving viewers the odds of something happening.

The American Gaming Association says a record 31.4 million American adults plan to bet on Sunday’s Super Bowl, a 35% increase from 2021. They are expected to wager more than $7 billion, a 78% increase from a year ago. Compared to last year, 45 million more Americans can legally wager at home.

When does this end? The Federal Communications Commission and Federal Trade Commission need to step in.

— Bob Dumas, Albertson