ipl-logo

Three Strikes Law In California

1071 Words5 Pages

Mandatory Sentencing The three strikes legislation is used as a deterrent in different states. This makes sense because if someone is aware that they will receive consequences for their actions, it will make them think twice before committing another crime. “Habitual felony laws, commonly known as three strikes legislation, began in 1993 when an initiative was placed on the ballot in Washington State, mandating the punishment of life imprisonment without parole for offenders convicted for a third time of specified violent or serious felonies.” (Banks, 2017).
Three Strikes Law In California I. INTRODUCTION
“California's Three Strikes sentencing law was originally enacted in 1994. The Legislature’s version of the law was created by amending …show more content…

In 1989, the state of California arrested 590,285 individuals for felonies, and violent offenses were at 118,601. In 1994, the year the law was enacted, felonies were at 581,264, and violent offenses were at 154,138. In 2005, felonies were at 538,166, and violent offenses were at 125,725. (Department of Justice. (n.d.)). The amount of felonies has dropped since the law was enacted, and violent offenses increased in 1994, but dropped again in 2005. For California, it seems like the three strikes rule has worked in deterring crime.
Public Opinion on Three Strikes …show more content…

According to an article by the ACLU, the three strikes law should be opposed. One of their reasons was that the three strikes law could lead to more violence. “Many law enforcement professionals oppose the "3 Strikes" law out of fear such laws would spur a dramatic increase in violence against police, corrections officers and the public” (ACLU, n.d.). Another reason why the three strikes law should be opposed, is because the three strikes will have a disproportionate impact on minority offenders. Being a minority is hard enough, minority offenders may be targeted and will receive more life sentences under three strikes rule. Lastly, the three Strikes laws will impose life sentences on offenders whose crimes don't warrant such harsh punishment. Not all crimes are the same. A violent offense such as breaking someone’s nose, as opposed to rape should not be given the same sentence. Yes, violence is never the answer, but it is not the equivalent to rape. The punishment should fit the crime. I oppose the three strikes legislation, a judge should be able to use discretion, and should not be forced to use mandatory sentencing. Judges should be able to sentence each individual based on what they think is best for the person. Sometimes certain individuals deserve a second chance or a break, the three strikes law will

Show More
Related
312 Words | 2 Pages

While researching this topic I have found multiple pros and cons of the three strikes law. Some of the pros that were mentioned include: repeat offenders will stay in prison; can deter offenders who have had two felony convictions from committing another crime; and it only applies to convictions. The first pro of the Three Strikes law is that repeat offenders will stay in prison for at least 25 years after their third conviction. If criminals choose to continue to break the law then will have to pay for their crimes. These criminals will not have a fourth chance to break the law.

Read More
226 Words | 1 Pages

The proposition that i am interested in is California proposition 36. Proposition 36 is about making changes to the three strike law. The changes that were made when proposition 36 passed is that is that a life sentence is only applied if charged with a serious or violent crime,Authorizes re-sentencing for offenders currently serving life sentences if their third strike conviction was not serious or violent and if the judge determines that the re-sentence does not pose unreasonable risk to public safety,Continues to impose a life sentence penalty if the third strike conviction was for "certain non-serious, non-violent sex or drug offenses or involved firearm possession.",and Maintains the life sentence penalty for felons with "non-serious,

Read More
612 Words | 3 Pages

John and Gerber claims that Proposition 47 is beneficial in that it essentially negates the "Three Strikes" laws, as many of the people in California's prison system that were sentences under that law were convicted crimes that California now considers misdemeanors. Another critical benefit cited by St. John and Gerber is that it greatly reduces overcrowding in California's prison system, which is known nationally for being extremely overcrowded. Finally, St. John and Gerber look at this as potentially reducing the caseload on the justice system by 40,000 people per year, as they will no longer be charged with felony crimes. (LATimes. Com "Prop

Read More
963 Words | 4 Pages

57 because they believe it would save the economy money by decreasing California’s prison inmate population. There are many people in prison who have committed serious felonies as well as people who just didn’t pay their parking ticket. According to the UCLA newspaper, the Daily Bruin, “It costs about $47,000 to incarcerate an inmate, almost $8,000 of which falls to the taxpayer.” (2016 Election: Yes on Proposition 57.) This being said, some people believe those $8,000 should go towards funding schools and other necessities but the burden it would set on the economy is one that is greater than finding ways to save money.

Read More
863 Words | 4 Pages

In 2012, Proposition 36 was approved by the voters in California. The amendment revised the Three Strikes Law by requiring a sentence of 25 years to life only if the third strike offense was serious or violent. Additionally, it allowed inmates who were serving a sentence of 25 years to life under the Three Strikes Law to petition for a sentence reduction if their third strike offense was not serious or violent (California Courts The Judicial Branch of California,

Read More
1209 Words | 5 Pages

Recently, the government has developed a tactic called the "three-strike rule. " This law was enacted in 1994 by Congress and the Clinton administration. The purpose of the law was to give longer sentences to those who were previously convicted of a violent or severe felony to prevent them from being released and doing a crime again. Due to this law being passed, many minorities stayed in prison for most of their lives. This caused the government and private companies to build more prisons and profit from them.

Read More
857 Words | 4 Pages

This is proven effective because a study in California showed that for every dollar invested in these courts, up to sixteen dollars are saved as a result of reduced recidivism. Also secondly the data on drug courts are no longer up for debate. There has been more research published on drug courts than other criminal justice program. Drug courts reduce crime up to fifty percent and have been shown to save thirteen thousand for every individual they serve. Furthermore, it is shown the seventy five percent of those who complete drug court are never arrested

Read More
875 Words | 4 Pages

The United States government legislate laws such as the “three strikes” law, created at the beginning of the War on Drugs, demands a minimum sentence of 25 years to life for three-time repeat offenders with multiple prior serious or violent felony convictions. As this law seems well-deserving of those who committed crimes filled with malice and ignorance, the evolution of this has landed American citizens in prison for life for multiple simple drug possessions. The Correction Corporation of America and the politicians who are supported by them, such as: Marco Rubio support the “three strikes” law and an even more detrimental law: mandatory minimum sentencing for nonviolent crimes, which have a ripple effect in the lives that are sent to

Read More
1149 Words | 5 Pages

Early on, even before the initiative passed problems were perceived regarding it’s structure. Unlike every other state that had a Three-Strikes Law, California’s stipulated that for habitual offenders any third felony could put them in for life, this included low level offenses like shop lifting or drug possessions. “During the first six weeks of the new law’s existence, Los Angeles County filed 152 third strike cases and 489 second strike cases” (Kieso, Douglas, W., 2005). Of the 152 Three-Strike cases, 37 were violent felonies, the rest were low level offenses some even as meager as a petty theft. “On July 30th, 1994 Jerry Dewayne Williams, 27, was arrested at the Redondo Beach Pier for taking a slice of pizza from some children ages 7 to 14.

Read More
166 Words | 1 Pages

The maximum length is set by legislators and the judge imposes the length of the sentence up to the maximum. Mandatory sentences are set by legislators instead of judges. Mandatory sentences set a penalty for certain crimes that is the standard for all offenders convicted of that crime. I do not believe three-strike laws should be implemented across

Read More
730 Words | 3 Pages

The crime statistics in America are alarming. Crime is out of control. Law abiding citizens are afraid to leave their homes. The Three Strikes laws imposed federally and by more than half the states currently, was supposed to make the streets safer for everyone. Imprisoning violent criminals for 25 years to life for continuing to commit violent felonies seems like a good idea.

Read More
1679 Words | 7 Pages

In 2009, California was ordered by a federal court to reduce their overcrowded prison population by 138 percent. The state had a massive incarceration rate during the “tough on crime” era (Alternative to Incarceration in California, 2015). In 1994, California had enacted a Three Strike Law. This law allows for offenders who have been convicted of a serious felony to be sentence to a prison term twice as long if they had a prior conviction. If they had two or more prior convictions then they would be mandated to a sentence of 25 years to life (California Courts,

Read More
390 Words | 2 Pages

There are many pros and cons resulting of this law. Some pros of the law is that it ends sentence disparity. Sentence disparity is when offenders are charged with the same crime and have similar arrest records but end up getting very different sentences. This is not only fair for all the offenders but also does not allow offender to get away with doing the minimum time allowed for the crime committed. Another pro is that it allows for easy crime control, what this means is

Read More
1678 Words | 7 Pages

However, crimes are committed whilst in prison, such as drugs and assaults. Some critics say the ‘three strikes and you are out’ law where repeat offenders get a longer sentence are wrong, as the third strike could be a lesser crime such as public disorder. Nevertheless, if just incapacitation and no rehabilitation some critics say will be costlier to society as they will go out and reoffend and, they are not employed and pay taxes. Rehabilitation is also a punishment which should improve the offender's behaviour and stop them committing crimes. Advocates of rehabilitation state prison does not work; however, critics of rehabilitation state prison does work as the criminal cannot commit a crime against the public while incarcerated (Cavadino, 2007 p 36/56).

Read More
1048 Words | 5 Pages

There is a worldwide trend in the use of penal imprisonment for serious offenses as capital punishment has been renounced by an increasing number of countries. Harsh punishments include capital punishment, life imprisonment and long-term incarceration. These forms of punishments are usually used against serious crimes that are seen as unethical, such as murder, assault and robbery. Many people believe that harsher punishments are more effective as they deter would-be criminals and ensure justice is served. Opposition towards harsh punishments have argued that harsher punishments does not necessarily increase effectiveness because they do not have a deterrent effect, do not decrease recidivism rates and do not provide rehabilitation.

Read More

More about Three Strikes Law In California

Related Topics

Open Document