Comparison Of Crime And Victimless Crimes

Each year, data are obtained from a nationally representative sample of about 90,000 households, comprising nearly 160,000 persons, on the frequency, characteristics, and consequences of criminal victimization in the United States. Each household is interviewed twice during the year. The survey enables BJS to estimate the likelihood of victimization by rape or sexual assault, robbery, aggravated and simple assault, theft, household burglary, and motor vehicle theft for the population as a whole as well as for segments of the population such as women, the elderly, members of various racial or ethnic groups, city dwellers, and other groups. The NCVS provides the largest national forum for victims to describe the impact of crime and characteristics of violent offenders.”

This paper looks at some of the problems with the three strikes legislation and how it affects different parties such as nonviolent offenders, the department of corrections system, the court system, and the public in general.

Another factor that has been brought up several times is the gun laws and how they contribute to the rates of homicide. I know you’ve heard the old saying, “guns don’t kill people, people with guns kill people.” This statement has been argued both ways and there is no real information to support the claim

The 3 Strikes Crime Law gives court system all across the nation unwavering power to inflict harsh sentencing laws on non-violent criminals. The 8th Amendment protects people from being subjected to cruel and unusual punishment, however, the 3 Strikes Crime Law allows States Courts to punish non-violent criminals just as severely as violent criminals. Many criminals with non-violent, non-serious crimes who have been sentenced under the harsh 3 Strikes Crime Law have appealed their cases and were denied reevaluation by the Supreme Court. The 3 Strikes Crime Law allows the court system to punish criminals based off of the amount of crimes they have committed, rather than the severity. When considering who this law affects it can be extremely unnerving, and often seems cruel.

In the 1990s, states began to execute mandatory sentencing laws for repeat offenders. This statute became known as “three strike laws”. The three strikes law increases prison sentence for people convicted of a felony. If you have two or more violent crimes or serious felonies, it limits the ability that offenders have to receive a punishment other than life sentencing. By 2003 over half of the states and federal government had enacted the “three strike laws”. The expectation behind it was to get career criminals off the street for the good of the public. However, the laws have their connoisseurs who charge sentences that are often excessive to the crimes committed and that incarcerate of three strike inmates for 25 years to life. Nevertheless, the US Supreme Court has upheld three strike laws and had rejected the fact that they amount to cruel and unusual punishment.

This paper looks at some of the problems with the three strikes legislation and how it affects different parties such as nonviolent offenders, the department of corrections system, the court system, and the public in general.

The Law has caused a huge controversial debate and there are people that personally disagree with the law. As in any controversial debate you would have the affirmative and the negative side. Let’s explore some of the positive facts that the Three Strikes Law that support the affirmative side. To start of with one popular note is that it keeps the career criminals, individuals who commit crime as a part of their lives, off the streets. Of course we want to keep the sex offenders, murderers, and rapist, off the street so we can worry that much less for the safety of ourselves and others. Another positive is that it is a deterrent. It is a very effective deterrent after the second conviction (Mersseli). If an offender is released from the second conviction, this law will deter them from any crime, whether it is minor or not. The thought of being sent to prison for 25 years to life is a pretty effective deterrent and will have that offender thinking more than twice before he or she will commit another crime.

Evidence suggests that we are more punitive when it comes to crimes relating to property and drugs, but not far from the norm when it comes to violent crimes. In the United States there is an unusually high incarceration rate, this is partly because

In addition to the war on drugs, the three-strikes law that came about under the Clinton administration allowed the private sector to gain access to the prison system which had a negative effect on the rate of incarceration and prisoner recidivism. “Bill Clinton, in maneuvering to the center, he signed all those crime bills, he made the American gulag, as vast as it is, with a lot of his legislation against the drug war, and he made it so that these disposable people could become grist for that horrible mill” (Moyers & Company). One of these laws that President Clinton signed was the three-strikes law, which basically stated that if a person has two prior convictions the third would sentence them to life in prison. Faced with the issues of

To formulate the law, it was decided that the most valuable approach to reduce violent crimes was through a mandated policy decision requiring identification through past behavior of those who demonstrated clear conduct to participate in violent criminal and whose conduct was not discouraged by the usual concepts of punishment. Reed (2004) stated, “The overall purpose of punishment within the criminal justice system is to prevent the commission of crimes to deter recidivism. For this objective to be successful, punishment must be effective in addressing the problems and solutions for the entire system, not just in individual cases” (p. 502). In reducing crimes, various methods and theories are taken into account. Some of these methods are additional police, additional courts, mandatory sentencing, and increased prosecutorial resources (Reed, 2004). Because the Three Strikes Law varies from state to state, this leads to the many problems it causes in the criminal justice system.

One of the most controversial laws in the efforts to reduce crime has been the "three-strikes" laws that have been enacted. This law, which is already in twenty-seven states, requires that offenders convicted of three violent crimes be sentenced to life in prison without chance of parole. The law is based on the idea that the majority of felonies are committed by about 6% of hard core criminals and that crime can be eliminated by getting these criminals off the streets. Unfortunately, the law fails to take into account its own flaws and how it is implemented.

Summary: This article speak about The Three Strike Law having good and bad effects on the United States. This source discuss when offenders stay in jail longer it mean that justice is being served. The articles also had a lot of negative thigs to say about the law, and it spoke about people think it destroys the flexibility of the court because each court and judge is different. Many citizens feel that it is causing a one fit all effect on the court , and they believe that is not how it should be. Also they feel that the rule give unreasonable punishments for certain crimes, and they feel that way because a 18 year old person can steal something more than once and get 25 years to life in prison. Many feel that it is not reasonable for somebody their age to get that much

I am going to begin by discussing the violent crime. There are 4 main classes of violent crime. These classes consist of: Murder and Negligient Homicide, Forcible Rape, Robbery and Aggravated Assault. These crimes are usually defined as offenses that include force or the threat of force. The violent crimes are listed under the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) program. There are other crimes which classify as violent crimes, these include: Burglary, Larceny-theft and Motor Vehicle theft. The FBI uses a system to classify crimes from the worst crime, Murder and Negligient Homicide, being at the top of the list, and the least serious crime, Motor Vehicle theft, being at the bottom of the list. One crime which is listed on both violent crimes and property crimes is Arson, depending on the circumstances surrounding the offense at the time.

1) Victimless crime can be defined as those types of actions and behavior that are illegal, although they do not affect the safety and personal rights of others. Individuals or groups of persons can commit victimless crimes. In cases that involve more than one person, only those capable of consenting to the actions are guilty of this type of crime (Liberal Democratic Party, 2009).

In this paper I will be talking about a couple of different crimes against people. Also according to statistics where you are more lightly to be a victim of one of these crimes. These statistics also show if your nationality might have an impact on you becoming a victim. Crimes against people can come in different forms unfortunately and from different people. So you never know who might committee the crime or against whom unless they have a pattern in killing for instance serial killers usually have a pattern. Any direst harm or force against another person. For instance stalking is a crime against a person because it does not require a threat or physical force to be a crime. As you learn more about these crimes you will notice that for