The Three Strikes Law By Mike Reynolds Summary

This chapter is a difficult and sad one. We have two cases of two teenagers dead in different circumstances, and two parents reacting differently to the same tragedy. Losing a child must be something unimaginable; something that causes you deep pain. It is difficult to understand the pain and suffering that person is feeling, without having gone through a similar situation. I cannot say who suffered more from both parents, because the suffering cannot be measured, but I wonder, which of the two parents handled better the suffering caused by the death of their daughter. For me the pain and suffering that caused the death of his daughter is the Goliath in this story; it is what both need to overcome in order to continue with their lives. Mike

But the mind of a criminal is difficult to understand, it is difficult to predict how they will act. He didn’t think about what could happen if the criminals didn’t think the same way as he. Reynolds misused some of Gladwell's strategies to defeat his Goliath. He don’t use the theory of inverted U wisely, he do not anticipate that in the inverted U Curve, what works in the beginning after a certain point stops working. With the Principle of Legitimacy, he was also wrong; the Three Strikes Law was not fair to all criminals; you could have two criminals in the same cell, one to life imprisonment for theft, and the other a minor sentence despite being a murderer. He doesn’t take into consideration that in order the principle work, they have to see you in a legitimate way. For the relatives of the prisoners, this law was not fair because it judged all the criminals in the same way, regardless of the type of crime committed; therefore they did not see the government as just and legitimate. If you do not comply with the three rules of this principle you can create a collateral damage and decrease the benefits. In the long run, the inappropriate use of power will turn against