Essay On 3 Strikes Law

After Marvin Wolfgang’s research, many see the point of the idea of the three-strike system, only severely punishing criminals after their third felony. California, who was one of the first states to adopt this law, saw their crime rate significantly drop within a decade. Since then many other states have adopted the same system. The theorists in today’s society are deciding that we should resort to deterrence, and rational punishment as opposed rehabilitation. We are resorting the ideas of James. Q. Wilson, who believes that deviants know that if they’re caught they will be punished. This is Wilson’s “new realism” (Images of Deviance and Social Control 84).

In 1994 Polly Klaas was kidnapped from a slumber party at her home in California and later murdered by Richard Allen Davis who already had 2 prior convictions for kidnapping on his record. The public was outraged that a repeat offender was able to attack again. Politicians catered to this outrage and sold the public on a bill that would repeat offenders off the streets for good with the three strikes and you’re out legislation.

In conclusion, the three strikes law will surely always be a policy that will be scrutinized by those affected by it. In the state of Texas, perhaps the policy should be looked at and amended as it has been in place since the 1950’s. Society has changed drastically since the advent of the law in Texas; many will argue that it has changed for the worse and the policy in needed more now than when it was implemented. It is this writers opinion that the policy serves a greater purpose, but could also be amended and made better by the great men and women we have in place in our criminal justice system. This great state must always strive to become even greater, and part of that comes from looking at policies that have been in place for decades

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.

According to President Bill Clinton, “We have a chance to pass the toughest, the smartest crime bill in the history of the United States,” and this was the California residents ' belief at the time the Three Strikes and you’re out law took effect in 1994.The purpose of the Three Strikes Law is to punish habitual offenders upon receiving their third conviction of any felony. Initially, if an individual receives a serious or violent felony conviction, this is a first strike; subsequently, the second serious or violent felony charge is a second strike and the individual will serve double the time originally assessed for the first felony. Finally, upon the third felony conviction an individual receives a minimum sentence of twenty five to life in prison. Even though twenty-three states, including the federal government, several politicians such as, Senator Bob Dole, and President Bill Clinton supported the passage of the Three Strikes Law. Undoubtedly, the Three Strikes bandwagon happened during a time in society when fear of crime was at its peak; as a result, law enforcement and other government officials went to the extreme in promising citizens to end habitual crime. Therefore, if the Three Strikes Law is to be a fair and impartial punishment for all criminals’ committing serious and violent crimes; then the crime committed must fit the consequences. Thus, is it fair to condemn a man who has two previous serious felonies for stealing a one dollar item on his third offense,

In 1993, Washington was the first state to pass the three strikes laws; however, it later became known as the Persistent Offender Accountability Act. According to this act, courts are required to sentence “persistent offenders” to a term of life in prison

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.

"Three Strikes and You're Out!” you think you would be hearing that phrase at a baseball game when a player has struck out but the phrase has been used as a metaphor for the three strikes law in California. It is a law that sentences repeated offenders, of serious or violent crimes, to twenty-five to life in prison. Although it seems desirable to put repeated offenders in prison, they are convicted even for petty crimes. It sentences an offender, whose first strike was a serious or violent crime, to serve a double sentence if the second crime is also serious or violent. The most controversial part of this law is that the third crime can be any crime, even misdemeanors, can “strike” out repeated offender because of their past felonies even

The Three Strikes Initiative is a proposition that should be passed in this year’s ballot voting. If passed, the proposition would serve of good use to the country and its citizens. Not to mention that it could even soften or diminish the severity of the Three Strikes Law. The Three Strikes Initiative is a proposition that will discard or even overlook not so serious or violent felonies. And in doing so, it will provide rehabilitation programs, county jails as a more effective choice, and for trails to be

Hispanics make up for 42% of the prison population in both Arizona and California. I personally don’t agree with the three strike law because I think the practices regarding the law is unjust and not fair. I think that the law will increase violence, increase unnecessary backlogs in the courts more than what they already face and have defendants facing harsh life sentences for crimes that shouldn’t be as

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.

This reduction eventually helped to deter criminals with the threat of increased incarceration. It has also been proven that three-strikes laws reduce felony arrest rates. People in favor of three-strikes laws believe that it is an example of effective crime control, a preventive measure for career felons, adds additional peace of mind for citizens, and provides harsher punishments for habitual offenders. On the other hand, those who are against the use of three strikes laws suppose that it adds an additional cost to courts and prisons, causes an over-population in prison cells, is an example of an unfair law, and is a result of the decline in the number of law enforcement officer

Many feel the Three strikes laws are necessary in today's criminal justice system. Some supporting arguments for this law state that it provides a fix for a flawed justice system. Secondly it is said that this law looks like a very good deterrent after the second conviction. Next, the media tends to mostly show trivial cases pertaining to the Three strikes law, instead o showing the usual perpetrators, for example murderers and robbers. Finally, the law pertains to three convictions, not three crimes. This means the criminal could get away with other non-reported incidents. (Balanced Politics.Org, p.1) The main target is repeat offenders.

The message sent to criminals is if you commit two felonies your skating on thin ice. It has also provided a solution for a flawed system of habitual offenders with no severe repercussions. The law states that it has to be three convictions not three crimes. So in reality criminals could get away with numerous incidents before actually being convicted. The media tends to distort the true effectiveness of the three strike laws by only providing information on cases that have been controversial due to a criminal being convicted to life in prison for stealing a car or forging checks (Balanced Politics). These are victimless crimes but what people tend to forget is that these criminals didn't receive life in prison for the last offense. They received this sentence due to the accumulation of the other offenses as well. This is what the media does not portray and the general population seems to forget when voicing their opinion by

California’s “three strikes” initiative which mandates life in prison for anyone convicted of three felonies