The 3 Strike Law is a law that applies to offender that have a history of being convicted of two or more violent crimes, and have moved on to committing another serious offense. Consequently, their prison sentence is increased in comparison to their previous sentences resulting in receiving a punishment to life in prison at their third offense. However, in 1994 the state of California enacted the law were criminals could be incarcerated when committing a non-violent crime for the third time, as long as they had a history of ever committing a serious or violent felony, the 3 Strike Law will still apply to them.
The 3 strike Law is beneficial to society by removing the criminals off the street and preventing them from ever putting people at risk of being victimized by them again. Criminals are not allows willing to change and most of them always end up going back to their same routines and crimes over and over again. By placing those criminals in jail, it lets society put a stop to ever
…show more content…
I truly believe that if someone is punished by having to spend the rest of their natural life in prison it should at least be for committing a serious crime. For those who have committed a non-violent or serious crime as their third offense and receives the same punishment, that can be seen as cruel. Not saying that offenders should not be punished but instead it would be best to find a better suited punishment for their crime. For example, one of the prisoners in the video was sentenced to life in prison for stealing a pair of socks, and other did not even have a history of ever committing a serious or violent offense. Aside from it seeming unfair, Michael Romano from the video also made a good point by mentioning that the 3 Strike Law is becoming “costly”. By locking up more and more offenders for a third non-violent crimes results in the prison having to spend more money in order to house all of the