It's just fascinating to me that conservatives get into a huge lather about the idea that the Second Amendment exists to protect us against government tyranny, and then overlook that half of the Bill of Rights (the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Eighth Amendments) primarily protect us against the criminal justice power of the government. - albaby

-------------------
We are talking about the treatment of career criminals here, not the rights of law abiding gun owners.

The presumption of innocence is a good thing. But to my way of thinking, with each felony conviction your presumption of innocence becomes a little more tarnished and at some point you lose (or should lose) your right to bail. Maybe that is not how the law presently is but if so it should be changed.

Judges should have the discretion to protect the public from established criminal predators even if the current charge is for a DUI. The word is discretion. They could still let him out on bail but that is way better than current laws which require him to let him out on bail.

DUI's are another too frequent example we hear about where some innocent family is wiped out by some guy driving drunk who has four or five prior DUI convictions. Maybe if he was still in jail waiting on trial for DUI #4, he would not have had the opportunity to commit DUI # where the family is killed Or Maybe that would not have saved the family but it is worth a try. And I don't care nearly as much about the rights of the driver in DUI #5 as I do about the innocent family he killed.

The governments primary obligation is the safety of citizens and releasing violent career criminals back on the street just as fast as possible works in opposition to that.