Three Strikes Laws

Other punitive measures, that have developed out of the just deserts mentality, such as three-strikes laws, which required life sentences for those with three convictions, as well as Scared Straight programs and boot camps, have negligible or detrimental effects to recidivism (Andrews & Bonta, 2010). Studies have repeatedly shown that long prison sentences and lack of rehabilitation actually increases the likelihood of reoffending (Canadian Civil Liberties Association [CCLA], 2011). While using punitive measures in the name of retribution may make those in society feel safe, there is no evidence to support this approach.

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

The “three strikes and you’re out” law is in effect in different states around the country. In basic terms, the law requires that any offender that is convicted of three violent crimes must receive a sentence of 25 years to life in prison. The law is aimed at reducing crime by focusing on the small percentage of criminals that commit the majority of violent crimes and felonies. Many systems have been lenient with repeat offenders, allowing

The Three-Strikes Law has three different components. Just like marriage, driving, and educational laws the Three-Strikes law has its own version in every state. Unfortunately California’s Three-Strikes law is causing the most controversy. The three parts in California’s law are the defendant’s record of prior convictions, the current charge and the minimum punishment the defendant is facing. A man or woman has to be convicted of two felonies and charged with another one before the Three-Strikes law can come into play. Dictionary.com defines a felony as “an offense, as murder or burglary, of graver character than those called misdemeanors, especially those commonly punished in the U.S. by imprisonment for more than a year” (Brauchli).

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.

Violent offenses included those of murder, attempted murder, rape, child molestation, and armed robbery. This law was also known as “Three Strikes You’re out” in reference to Baseball. The law implemented mandatory life imprisonment under two circumstances. The individual has too have been convicted in federal court for a violent felony. Second, the individual has to have two or more previous convictions both in federal or state courts. The third felony charge resulted in a 25 to life imprisonment without parole. California was the second state to pass the three-strike law in hope to decrease the crime rate. However California is the only state that punishes minor crimes with a life sentence. The Three Strikes Law has decreased violent crimes in California but has decreased at a similar rate than other states who do not have this law. Today California has sentenced more than 40,000 offenders under the Three Strikes Law (Three Strikes Laws Five Years Later 1). The California Department of Corrections reported that 65%, ⅔ of those sentenced under California’s Three Strikes laws were imprisoned for nonviolent offenses (Three Strikes and You’re Out 1). Out of the 400,000 offenders sentenced under the three strike law African Americans make up 43% of it. Studies also prove that blacks make up 7% of our states population but they account for 20% of felony arrests, and 31% of the prison population(Three Strikes Law Five Years Later

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,

. 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

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.

This involved of a very detailed outline of my HCP essay about my new topic on Three Strikes law in New Mexico. It has concepts that is associated with what define Three Strikes Law in New Mexico and some examples what led the Three Strikes law to be passed in 1994 and some of the argument points that helped me to reinforce my evidences in my paper. This helped me a lot to create a good multi-modal composition project.

Today there is a growing awareness of repeat offenders among society in reference to crime. Starting around 1980 there was noticeable increase in crime rates in the U.S.. In many of these cases it was noted that these individuals were in fact repeat offenders. So, on March 7, 1994 California enacted the Three-Strikes and You’re Out Law. This laws and other laws like it are currently being utilized today all around the Untied States. This law was first backed by victim’s rights advocates in the state to target habitual offenders. The reason California holds the most importance on this law is due to the fact that it has the largest criminal justice system in America, and it has the most controversy surrounding this law in

The three strikes law was implemented in the early 1990's for offender that are consider to be an extreme nuisance to the community as well as being called habitual offenders. These criminals are ones that have committed two felonies and are on their third. Now with that being said the third felony does not have to be a severe or heinous act. The third felony could be something as simple as grand larceny or forgery (The free dictionary, Three Strike Laws). The three strike laws were first adopted by Washington state and shortly there a California adopted the three strike law due to an emotional murder that was committed by a felon convicted twice before (total criminal defense). By 2003, more than half of the United States had adopted the three strike laws. Many States do have provisions under these laws called "habitual offender" provisions and these people are only affected by

In order to be Law-abiding, we need only be and do as God is and does; and although that may sound impossible, it is not as daunting as it seems. As an example, consider whether or not God forgives. If you believe that It forgives, then forgiveness is not only It's nature, forgiving is what It does, a principle of It's Law. Therefore, the three strikes rule cannot be a Law, since by nature and principle, Life is forgiving, and you can keep on swinging! Life is going to keep on providing another chance, and another, for as long as you keep trying. And furthermore, when you finally get it right, it is as right as if you connected on your first attempt. For in a universe of Life and Light, no matter how long one has ignored the Light and cursed