Sense And Nonsense About Crime And Drugs Summary

Since the policy was enacted in the early 1990s, three strikes laws have been one of the most controversial issues facing the American criminal justice system. In general, advocates believe that locking up criminals will protect society. Critics believe that three-strike policy can only be effective with offenders that are on their last strikes (Worrall, 2008). However, other critics explain how three-strike laws don’t significantly reduce crime because most criminals mature out of the criminal lifestyle (Worrall, 2004).

Numerous amounts of research has been conducted on the effectiveness of the three strikes sentencing policy, one of the more thorough ones to come along examined three strikes policy throughout the United States and came an interesting conclusion about the effectiveness of three strikes sentencing laws. The study found three strikes law to be ineffective in reducing crime in a variety of areas. The study found that rarely are they concerned with being caught for their crime, this was further attributed by the fact that a great deal

The "three strike law" increases the prison sentence of an individual convicted of a felony who has been previously convicted of two or more felonies, and limits the offender to receive anything but a punishment of a life sentence. Twenty-six of the fifty states implement laws that meet the same criteria that would be considered as a " three strike" law. This law was designed to keep those more likely to commit another crime out of the general public however, decrease in violent crimes after this law was implemented is opposing. This essay brings reflection upon how justifiable the third strike rule is.

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,

The California’s Three Strikes Law was an act that came into place under the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994. The law was enacted to help deal with violent repeat offenders. The essence of three strikes law was to require a defendant convicted of any new felony, suffered prior convictions of a serious felony to be sentenced to state prison. In this paper I will discuss the three strikes laws adding to prison overcrowding, does it targets non-violent offenders, and are these laws a deterrent. America’s incarceration addiction grew during the late 1980s and early 1990s, as state and local government passed the “three strikes” law called for mandatory sentencing of repeat offenders. California's "three strikes and you're

In March 1994, California voted to pass the Three Strikes Law with the majority of the vote, a bill that had been struck down multiple times by the state legislature (Naomi Harlin Goodno). This law would allow criminals with two prior felonies on their records to receive life in prison. These laws were proposed to keep serious repeat offenders off the streets, this was a result of the rising crime rate of the nineties. The law was presented to the electorate as a way to keep rapists, child molesters and killers of the streets, the most incorrigible of inmates; however, it has been proven that such laws unproportionally target minorities and persons with mental illnesses. African Americans are incarcerated at a rate thirteen times higher than

Originating in Washington State in 1993, by the end of that year, over half of all states, including the federal government had enacted their variation of a “three strikes” law. Roughly contemporaneous with these measures, crime rates have declined nationwide.”(Michael, V. (2002) para. 1) “This law approving mandated life in prison without parole for offenders convicted of committing serious offenses such as murder, rape, and robbery a third time.” (Meehan, K. (2014) para4).

Another advantage of the three strikes law is that it provides assistance to repair a defective justice system so convicted felons who choose to be repeat offenders will stay in prison. In today’s society, most crimes are committed by repeat offenders. (Kitchen, 2008). One possible reason this could be is that it is the way of life for most. The streets and committing crimes is all they know and have grown accustomed to. They commit crimes in hopes of never getting caught but they eventually they do. But even with this, they continue to commit crimes because that is what they know. Another possible reason could be that some repeat offenders commit crimes because they would rather be locked up behind bars then out in society. Some actually know that they are incapable of living civilized lives so they choose to commit crimes to be in a place where they are accepted for who they are. So because most crimes are committed by repeat offenders, this law was implemented as an instrument that the system can use to prevent such actions. It also helps with the reduction of liberal sentences, plea bargaining, and case backlogs. (Kitchen, 2009)

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

These are the people hardest hit by this law. According Carter, before the three strikes law was enacted it had been estimated that to keep up with the growing prison population on a national level that it was necessary to spend $100,000,000 per week on our prison system (1). Now that we will be having more and more criminals behind bars we shall have to spend even more money building and keeping up our overcrowded prisons. Of these people that taxpayers are paying to imprison Carter suggests that as many as 80% will be non-violent offenders (3). So far 80% of the second and third strike offenses have been for non-violent crimes, most of these being drug offenses (3-4). There have only been only 53 people with second and third strike convictions for rape, murder, and kidnapping (1). This law's lack of effectiveness clearly does not warrant its huge price. It is difficult see how society can justify sending a drug addict to prison for 25 years at a cost of $20,000 per year when the money could be used to fund drug rehabilitation centers and alternative programs for our youth. Most drug users are not in need prison, they are in need of help for their addictions. If a fraction of the money it would cost to imprison them is put toward drug rehabilitation programs it would save the state money, while at the same time helping the individual. The three strikes legislation is directly aimed at violent crime, but its track record has shown that it has missed the mark by a long

The three strikes law is a law that was originally proposed in California in 1994 from the state of Washington. This law was created under the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act. The purpose of three strike law is to convict prior felons who commit any new felonies to be sentenced to twice the term then what the original crime is usually served for. The main purpose of the three strikes law was also to increase the defendant’s sentence to prevent them from early release and committing further crimes in the communities.

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.

People who support the programs feel like it helps to reduce crime and arrest rates which will eventually help 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 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. Those who are against the use of three strikes laws believe that it adds an additional cost to courts and prisons, causes an over population in prison cells, is an example of unfair law, and is a result of the decline in the number of law enforcement officer

When I think of the Three Strikes Law, and how it has been in place for more than 40 years, I understand the tradition it carries with it, the “why fix what is not broken” attitude (Sutton 1). However, what may not be completely broken still needs a major renovation, especially when it comes to non-person felonies, specifically drug related crimes. Drug related crimes, still a part of the Three Strikes Law in many states come with a multitude of issues, yet I believe offering some sort of treatment option will prevent excess costs that follow the Three Strikes Law, and perhaps even prevent further crimes from happening. In order to present the best case, I will discuss the effects of safety, and costs involved with the Three Strikes Law.

     We are pretty successful with achieving the purposes of the criminal law. Criminal law keeps everyday Americans safe and gets many bad guys of the streets as possible but the three strikes law is drastic. It definitely seems like an affective deterrent but the sentencing is unbelievable especially, if it’s not a serious crime. “The prison