The Strike Law Is A Real Problem

The state of Washington passed the first three strikes law in 1993. Anyone convicted of three separate violent felonies must be sentenced to life in prison without a chance for parole. Then on March 8th, 1994, California followed by enacting the law that sanctioned a sentence of 25 years to life for a third felony conviction. Contrary to Washington, the California law counts nonviolent felonies, such as burglary and theft as “strike” offences; by 2001, over 50,000 criminals had been penalized under the new law, far more than any other state, with almost a quarter of the prisoners facing a minimum of 25 years

In retrospect, should the three strikes law in Texas be amended or abolished? There is an on-going problem that our society faces, and that is prison over-population. According to The Texas Tribune, as of August 2016, there are 143,252 inmates in the Texas prison system. Would an abolishment of the three strikes rule help to alleviate the over-population of Texas prisons? California felt it important enough to take a look at their policy and amended it, should Texas do the same? Many will argue that if an individual commits a third felony that they should be incarcerated for life as they are a menace to society and not helping that community to evolve and become better. The three strikes law is something that can always be argued for

According to the Legislative Analyst’s Office information guide, “ The Three Strikes and You're Out Law,” the purpose the Three Strikes Law is to enhance the sentences of really dangerous criminals like rapists, murderers, and many other crimes. This law has led to fewer guilty pleas, increase in jury trials, and to a “reduction in crimes committed by repeat offenders incarcerated for longer periods during its provisions, thus resulting in savings to local and state governments,” (The Three Strikes and You're Out Law). Susan Fisher states that proposition “ 57 effectively overturns key provisions of Mercy’s Law, 3 Strikes and You're Out, Victims Bill of Rights, Californians Against Sexual Exploitation Act - measures enacted by voters that has protected victims and made communities safer, ” (Proposition 57 Voter Information Guide). The purpose of the Three Strikes Law is also to prevent recidivism. Many people, however, have questioned the effectiveness of this law, especially since this law has increased the populations in some prisons, especially those in California, as stated in the article, “Three Strikes Sentencing Law.” However, the Legislative Analyst’s Office guide states that “ the number of inmates sent to prison under the Three Strikes law will be less than it originally projected,” (The Three Strikes and You're Out Law). Although it is criticized for keeping more criminals

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,

Throughout the years, there has been much controversy weather The Three Strike Law is cruel and unjust. Was the intent to get violent repeat officers incarcerated for a long period, or to get all offenders with three strikes off the streets? Within hours, after the law went into effect California had its first offender, arrested while attempting to a steal a car radio and two nonviolent burglaries on his record, a homeless schizophrenic, Lester Wallace, sentenced to twenty-five years. He has been sexually and physically attacked, suffered seizures, developed back problems, and end- stage renal disease. Although within months California reformed the law, the state wont released this dying man. Curtis Wilkerson strolled into a department store,

Washington state passed the three strikes law policy first in 1993. Any individual convicted of three separate violent felonies was to be sentenced to life in prison with no opportunity for Parole. In 1994, The state of California followed by enforcing a three strikes law that required a minimum sentence of 25 years to life for a third felony conviction. Washington and California differed in the interpretation of felonies the California law considered nonviolent felonies, such as theft and burglary as a "strike" offenses. By 2001 California had over 50,000 criminals sentenced under the new “ Three Strokes Policy” more than any other state in the United States.

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

The Three Strikes Law has been a subject of much debate since its introduction as a regulation in 1993. The Three Strikes law was enacted in 1994 and is widely recognized as the harshest sentencing law in the United States. “The State of Texas was the first State to enact such a law in 1974.” (Laws.com) California passed its own law enacting a Three Strikes Law that mandates a sentence of 25 years to life for a third felony conviction. The reality of the Three Strikes Law will lead to a significant increase in the nation's

. I do not think, so I need to change anything in my current problem from the HCP to AP. My current problem is that for the last few years, three strikes law has enormously increased more crimes in New Mexico. A main reason there is an increase in New Mexico is because in New Mexico the three strikes law is mainly only applied for 5 specific crimes such as kidnapping, armed robbery, murder, shooting, and criminal sexual penetration. Moreover, there is debate going on in New Mexico that the crime rate is rising very rapidly to increase that New Mexico government need to toughen the three strikes law. Governor Martinez is arguing that the three strikes law is very weak that is no narrow that no inmate is currently serving a life sentence under it. There are many criminals out there on the streets of New Mexico who keep crimes but there is no one to stop them because most of the crimes in New Mexico do not even apply to the three strikes law. This is the few of the reasons why New Mexico crime rate is still high.

Between 1993 and 1995, 24 states and the federal government adopted some form of the three strikes law, which reduced judicial discretion practices and mandated severe incarceration periods to those who were convicted of three or more felonies (Peak, 2012). The rational of the three-strikes you are out law was an attempt to protect society and deter crime by targeting repeat offenders such as murders, rapists, and child molesters by locking them up for long periods of time. The law was built around a political push in the early nineties adopted around public perception that the prison system was lenient on criminals and society needed to get tough on crime. While the three-strike law was intended

The criminal justice issue that has been chosen as the topic on this course project is the “three strike” sentencing and how it should be abolished. The three strike sentencing was established in 1994 under the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act. (Harris, 1995). In this act, the statute of three strike sentencing provides a mandatory life imprisonment sentence for convicted felons that have been convicted in a federal court for a serious

The purpose of the Three Strikes Law is to reduce serious or violent crime rates and provide a means to practice racial disparity in sentencing. The law is also intended to give longer sentences to offenders who are convicted three times. Usually, the first and second convictions result in punishment, but of a more routine appeal. Justice James A. Ardaiz, the Fifth Appellate District of California explained,

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.

It is hard if not impossible to justify using a person as a means of promoting some good if doing so will harm him (Walen, 2016, p.741), I think the punishment of the three strikes law is extremely excessive for non-violent crimes. The Three Strikes statue provides for mandatory life imprisonment if a convicted felon has been convicted for a serious violent felony. Most repeat offenders are not discouraged from committing violent acts of crime and because of this reason the habitual sentencing does not work as a