In 1994 California voters approved a ballot initiative known as Three Strikes and Youre Out. The law states that people who are convicted of three felonies may end up facing life in prison (Mullins).
The Three Strikes law increases the prison sentences of persons convicted of felonies who have been previously convicted of a violent or serious felony, and limits the ability of these offenders to receive a punishment other than a prison sentence. Violent offenses include murder, robbery with a deadly weapon, rape and other sex offenses; serious offenses include the same offenses defined as violent offenses, but also include other crimes such as burglary of a residence and assault with intent to commit robbery or rape (Mullins).
The Three Strikes law is a controversial law that has raised many issues among todays society. Those who support the law claim that it is a necessity to crack down on violent offenders. Those who oppose the Three Strikes law argue that it is a loser because it could lead to an increase in violent offenses. According to former California Attorney General, Dan Lungren, There is just no way to ignore the positive impact of the Three-Strikes Law. Californias drop in crime is outperforming similar downward trends in other parts of the nation (Males, Macallair, Taqi-Edin).
The Three-Strikes, admired by its supporters, receive the name because the provision requires 25 to life prison terms for defendants convicted of any felony who were already convicted of two serious or violent felonies. The law was approved by three fourths of California voters because it promised to reduce violent crimes and put repeat offenders in jail for life, thus lowering the crimes rate. The Three Strikes law strives to clean up violence in California by allowing the justice system to punish criminals in a fair and just manner: One, Two, Three, Youre out! The guidelines of the law are clear, cut and precise. One has up to three chances before facing life in prison. Supporters believe that this will encourage people to make better choice once they have been given another chance (Mullins).
The Term Paper on Anti-Crime Law: Three Strikes, You’re Out
... lot of talk about serious and violent felonies in the law and there are certain offenses that must be met in order ... least one prior serious or violent felony conviction must serve any subsequent felony sentence in a state prison (as opposed to a ... debate over the “Three Strikes law, opponents argued that the prison system would become overfilled with non-violent offenders serving life terms. Trying ...
Three Strikes inevitably displays Californias desire to clean up the war on crime.
With stricter law enforcement and a consistent judiciary system, this law will serve as a promise to all offenders, victims and their families. Those who favor Three Strikes believe in its purpose and defend the law from their opposers. The catchy baseball metaphor, one, two, threeyoure out, had not only provided promise for California residents by keeping violent offenders behind bars, but by developing a no tolerance provision for criminal to abide by. Although the Three Strikes law has avid supporters who believe that the declination of crime is attributed to the law, those who do not support the law contest that it is a failure. Although its supporters act as if it is something new, Three Strikes is really just a variation on an old theme. States have had habitual offender laws and recidivist statutes for years.
All of these laws impose stiff penalties, up to and including life sentences, on repeat offenders. The 1987 Federal Sentencing Guidelines and mandatory minimum sentencing laws in most states are also very tough on repeaters. The government may be justified in punishing a repeat offender more severely than a first offender, but Three Strikes laws are overkill (Mullins).
Its supporters claim that the Three Strikes law will have a deterrent effect on violent crime. These laws will probably not stop many criminals from committing violent acts. For one thing, most violent crimes are not premeditated.
The Essay on Strikes Law Criminals Crime Violent
... prevent as many as 21 crimes (Swanson, 342). It can be argued that the Three Strikes law stops repeat violent offenders with the threat of ... excess of 93 people a day. These victims receive a life sentence of pain, fear, and often death. The perpetrators who ... or under the influence of alcohol. The prospect of a life sentence is not going to stop people who are acting ...
They are committed in anger, in the heat of passion or under the influence of alcohol. The prospect of a life sentence is not going to stop people who are acting impulsively, without thought to the likely consequences of their actions. Another reason why repeat offenders do not consider the penalties they face before acting are because they do not anticipate being caught, and they are right. According to the American Bar Association, out of the approximately 34 million serious crimes committed each year in the U.S., only 3 million result in arrests. Many law enforcement professionals oppose the Three Strikes law out of fear that such laws would spur a dramatic increase in violence against police, correction officers and the public. (Deputy Sheriff Matt Soda) A criminal facing the prospect of a mandatory life sentence will be far more likely to resist arrest, to kill witnesses or to attempt a prison escape. Dave Paul, a correction officer from Milwaukee, Oregon, wrote in a newspaper article: “Imagine a law enforcement officer trying to arrest a twice-convicted felon who has nothing to lose by using any means necessary to escape. Expect assaults on police and correctional officers to rise precipitously (Officer Anthony Maze).
Ironically, these laws may cause more, not less, loss of life.
Those who oppose the Three Strikes law also argue that under our system of criminal justice, the punishment must fit the crime. Just as police and other law enforcement should not have to fill the raft of this law, criminals that do not commit violent crimes should not have to suffer for life. Individuals should not be executed for burglarizing a house nor incarcerated for life for committing relatively minor offenses, even when they commit several of them. This principle, known as “proportionality,” is expressed in the Eighth Amendment to the Bill of Rights: “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.” Many of the Three Strikes proposals depart sharply from the proportionality rule by failing to take into consideration the gravity of the offense. Pennsylvania’s proposed law treat prostitution and burglary as “strikes” for purposes of imposing a life sentence without parole. Several California proposals provide that the first two felonies must be violent, but that the third offense can be any felony, even a non-violent crime like petty theft.
The Essay on Three Strikes For Life
... the criminal receiving a mandatory life sentence. California's three-strikes law says that if someone commits a third felony after committing two prior similar felonies, ... and Gun Laws "u Crimes Causing Harm to Property. Burglary "u Robbery As long as the violator is being sent to prison for ...
Such laws offend our constitutional traditions. According to the American Civil Liberties Unions, implementation of the Three-Strikes will lead to a significant increase in the prison population. Today, it costs about $20,000 per year to confine a young, physically fit offender. But Three Strikes laws would create a huge, geriatric prison population that would be far more expensive to care for. The estimated cost of maintaining an older prisoner is three times that required for a younger prisoner — about $60,000 per year. The cost might be worth it if older prisoners represented a danger to society. But experts tell us that age is the most powerful crime reducer. Men between the ages of 15 and 24 commit most crimes.
Only one percent of all serious crimes are committed by people over age 60 (Males, Macallair, and Taqi-Edin).
In 1997, the Justice Policy Institute conducted a study which found that Californias declining crime rates were not different from state without the Three Strikes law (Males, Macallair, Taqi-Edin).
This evidence undermines the crime control arguments of the laws proponents. Males, Macallair, and Taqi-Edin conducted a study proving that the counties of California who invoke the Three Strikes law at higher rates did not experience the greatest decrease in crime. Criminologists that reviewed this study concluded that the decrease in crime should be attributed to the stabilizing of crack trade, stronger economy and more incarceration (Males, Macallair, Taqi-Edin).
There has been no concrete evidence supporting the Three Strikes law on targeted populations and its reduction on crime.
The justice Policy Institute recommends the following should be considered: Repealing the currents version of Three-Strikes Amend the Three Strikes law requiring the third strike to be a violent crime Further research by the legislature into the crime control impact of Three-Strikes and its financial impact on Californias budget. If the suggestions such as the ones above are taken into consideration, opposers of the Three Strikes law may re-evaluate the provisions, thus eliminating the harsh feelings of non-supporters. Perhaps the Three Strikes law is far more complex than we have realized. Both parties present valid arguments as to why or why not the law is necessary in our court systems. My opinion is split between the pros and cons of the law. I believe that it is necessary to tighten up crime control, but it is important that the people we are sending to prison have committed a crime serious enough for a life sentence.
The Essay on Curfew Law Crime Arrested Rate
Lets say your daughter is walking down the street at 10: 00 P. M. to get some eggs and milk for breakfast tomorrow morning. But while she is walking back, a cop stops her for a curfew violation. The officer arrests her, searches her, and brings her into the station. Finally after three hours later, after you are worried sick, the police call you and say, "your daughter has been arrested for ...
If we slap all criminals on the hand with the same paddle, our jails and prisons will be over crowded and its the taxpayers money that will be wasted. I understand the need for strict law such as Three Strikes. However, the law needs to inevitably prove that it is reducing the crime rate in order for all of California residents to justify its provisions.
