Yes, and as I pointed out before, the consequence is potentially devastating. It will massively reduce one's net worth (since most people have most of their "savings" tied up in their house), and your ability to borrow against the property (which is a safety net for many).
To elaborate on your point (cause I'm a pedant), the real problem with this is having your home on that list basically nukes the value of your home. For many people their home is their primary asset. So, with a form, they can destroy the net worth of most people. Land of the what now?
Well, I don't think it's necessarily not understanding the humour. The episode with the bleeding virgin mary statue was well over the line for me ***in terms of finding it funny***.
While I found the episode gross, not funny (particularly because there are many better holes to poke in Catholicism), the idea of censoring the show because of it's not funny and gross (to me) is ridiculous.
A half a MEEEEELLION dollars bail seems ridiculous unless the judge really thought the kid was a flight risk, but IMO that would need to be substantiated by more than "ZOMG 9/11 + he was mean on teh intarwebz".
As you point out, the idiocy of the North American penal system, which tends to brutalize and criminalize people, is an MCF (Mongolian Cluster Fuck).
Even if one puts aside the rights of the incarcerated (not advocating such, but for sake of argument), society is benefited by rehabilitation rather than the Lord of the Flies stuff that happens now.
Being selfish for a minute, having this kid brutalized and making him more likely to arm himself and lash out since he (correctly) perceives that his world is a fucked up and dangerous place, is worse for ME, and doing countless times to people indicted for non-violent offenses is significantly worse for me. My point is that the "law & order" stumping for "tougher penalties", when criminal "justice" is as it is actually begets crime.
The complaint in the article is more that it's too easy to get a Grand Jury to indict (the indictment every 52 seconds part summarizes this). The goal, per the article, is not to route around or skip the Grand Jury, rather to increase rigor so that the Grand Jury process is less inclined to result in indictment.
Please note this is not my opinion (I'm nt close enough to criminal justice procedures to really form an opinion on this), rather I'm trying to clarify the article.
I don't think they lack for funding. I think the problem is more fundamental.
If your job consists of security theatre plus Operation Intimidate the Brown People, you're essentially a self important bullshit artist.
Software, on the other hand, deals exclusively in hard facts. It doesn't matter how awesome you think you are, how many Medals of Freedom you've been awarded, or how great a bureaucratic political operative you are, if you're in charge of a software project and you're full of shit, the project will fail.
I've seen it countless times. Software cannot be dazzled, cajoled, double-talked at, massaged, convinced, etc... You either know the methodology and push towards delivery or you're in the way.