Skip to content

Goal Of Three Strikes Law Essay

10 Reasons to Oppose "3 Strikes, You're Out"

The American public is alarmed about crime, and with good reason. Our crime rate is unacceptably high, and many Americans feel like prisoners in their own homes, afraid to venture out for fear of becoming another statistic. 

For more than past 20 years, state and federal crime control policies have been based on the belief that harsh sentencing laws will deter people from committing crimes. But today, with more than one million people behind bars, and state budgets depleted by the huge costs of prison construction, we are no safer than before. New approaches to the problem of crime are needed, but instead, our political leaders keep serving up the same old strategies. 

Take the so-called "3 Strikes, You're Out" law, for example. Embraced by state legislators, Congress and the President himself, this law imposes a mandatory life sentence without parole on offenders convicted of certain crimes. Despite its catchy baseball metaphor, this law is a loser, for the following reasons. 


1. "3 Strikes" Is An Old Law Dressed Up In New Clothes 


Although its supporters act as if it is something new, "3 Strikes" is really just a variation on an old theme. States have had habitual offender laws and recidivist statutes for years. All of these laws impose stiff penalties, up to and including life s entences, on repeat offenders. The 1987 Federal Sentencing Guidelines and mandatory minimum sentencing laws in most states are also very tough on repeaters. The government may be justified in punishing a repeat offender more severely than a first offender, but "3 Strikes" laws are overkill. 


2. "3 Strikes" Laws Won't Deter Most Violent Crimes 


Its supporters claim that "3 Strikes" laws will have a deterrent effect on violent crime. But these laws will probably not stop many criminals from committing violent acts. For one thing, most violent crimes are not premeditated. They are committed in anger, in the heat of passion or under the influence of alcohol. The prospect of a life s entence is not going to stop people who are acting impulsively, without thought to the likely consequences of their actions. 

Another reason why repeat offenders do not consider the penalties they face before acting is because they do not anticipate being c aught, and they are right. According to the American Bar Association, out of the approximately 34 million serious crimes committed each year in the U.S., only 3 million result in arrests. 


3. "3 Strikes" Laws Could Lead To An Increase In 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. A criminal facing the prospect of a mandatory life sentence will be far more likely to resist arrest, to kill witnesses or to attempt a prison escape. Dave Paul, a corrections officer from Milwaukee, Oregon, wrote in a newspaper article: "Imagine a law enforcement officer trying to arrest a twice-convicted felon who has nothing to lose by using any means necessary to escape. Expect assaults on police and correctional officers to rise precipitously." (Portland Oregonian, 3/94). Ironically, these laws may cause more, not less, loss of life. 


4. "3 Strikes" Laws Will Clog The Courts 


The criminal courts already suffer from serious backlogs. The extraordinarily high arrest rates resulting from the "war on drugs" have placed enormous burdens on prosecutors, defense lawyers and judges, whose caseloads have grown exponentially over the past decade. "Three strikes" laws will make a bad situation even worse. Faced with a mandatory life sentence, repeat offenders will demand costly and time-consuming trials rather than submit to plea bargaining. Normal felonies resolved by a plea bargain cost $600 to defend, while a full blown criminal trial costs as much as $50,000. Since most of the defendants will be indigent and require public defenders, the expense of their defense will be borne by taxpayers. 


5. "3 Strikes" Laws Will Take All Sentencing
Discretion Away From Judges 


The "3 Strikes" proposals differ from most habitual offender laws in that they make life sentences without parole mandatory. Thus, they tie the hands of judges who have traditionally been responsible for weighing both mitigating and aggravating circumstances before imposing sentence. Judicial discretion in sentencing, which is admired all over the world for treating people as individuals, is one of the hallmarks of our justice system. But the rigid formula imposed by "3 Strikes" renders the role of sentencing judges almost superfluous. 

Eliminating the possibility of parole ignores the fact that even the most incorrigible offenders can be transformed while in prison. Countless examples are on record of convicts who have reformed themselves through study, good works, religious conversion or other efforts during years spent behind bars. Such people ought deserve a second chance that "3 Strikes" laws make impossible. 


6. The Cost of Imprisoning 3-Time Losers For Life
Will Be Prohibitively High 


The passage of "3 Strikes" laws will lead to a significant increase in the nation's already swollen prison population, at enormous cost to taxpayers. Today, it costs about $20,000 per year to confine a young, physically fit offender. But "3 Strikes" laws would create a huge, geriatric prison population that would be far more expensive to care for. The estimated cost of maintaining an older prisoner is three times that required for a younger prisoner -- about $60,000 per year. 

The cost might be worth it if older prisoners represented a danger to society. But experts tell us that age is the most powerful crime reducer. Most crimes are committed by men between the ages of 15 and 24. Only one percent of all serious crimes are committed by people over age 60. 


7. "3 Strikes" Will Have a Disproportionate Impact
On Minority Offenders 


Racial bias in the criminal justice system is rampant. African American men, in particular, are overrepresented in all criminal justice statistics: arrests, victimizations, incarceration and executions. 

This imbalance is largely the result of the "war on drugs." Although studies show that drug use among blacks and whites is comparable, many more blacks than whites are arrested on drug charges. Why? because the police find it easier to concentrate their forces in inner city neighborhoods, where drug dealing tends to take place on the streets, than to mount more costly and demanding investigations in the suburbs, where drug dealing generally occurs behind closed doors. Today, one in four young black men is are under some form of criminal sanction, be it incarceration, probation or parole. 

Because many of these laws include drug offenses as prior "strikes," more black than white offenders will be subject to life sentences under a "3 Strikes" law. 


8. "3 Strikes" Laws Will Impose Life Sentences on Offenders Whose Crimes Don't Warrant Such Harsh Punishment 


Although "3 Strikes" sponsors claim that their purpose is to protect society from only the most dangerous felons, many of the "3 Strikes" proposals encompass a broad range of criminal conduct, from rape to minor assaults. In an open letter to the Washington State voters, more than 20 current and former prosecutors urged the public to vote against the "3 Strikes" proposal. To explain why they opposed the law's passage, they described the following scenario: 

"An 18-year old high school senior pushes a classmate down to steal his Michael Jordan $150 sneakers -- Strike One; he gets out of jail and shoplifts a jacket from the Bon Marche, pushing aside the clerk as he runs out of the store -- Strik e Two; he gets out of jail, straightens out, and nine years later gets in a fight in a bar and intentionally hits someone, breaking his nose -- criminal behavior, to be sure, but hardly the crime of the century, yet it is Strike Three. He is sent to prison for the rest of his life." 


9. Let the Punishment Fit the Crime -- A Constitutional Principle 


Under our system of criminal justice, the punishment must fit the crime. Individuals should not be executed for burglarizing a house nor incarcerated for life for committing relatively minor offenses, even when they commit several of them. This principle, known as "proportionality," is expressed in the Eighth Amendment to the Bill of Rights: 

"Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted." 

Many of the "3 Strikes" proposals depart sharply from the proportionality rule by failing to take into consideration the gravity of the offense. Pennsylvania's proposed law treats prostitution and burglary as "strikes" for purposes of imposing a life s entence without parole. Several California proposals provide that the first two felonies must be "violent," but that the third offense can be any felony, even a non-violent crime like petty theft. Such laws offend our constitutional traditions. 


10. "3 Strikes" Laws Are Not A Serious Response To Crime 


The "3 Strikes" proposals are based on the mistaken belief that focusing on an offender after the crime has been committed, which harsh sentencing schemes do, will lead to a reduction in the crime rate. But if 34 million serious crimes are committed each year in the U.S., and only 3 million result in arrest, something must be done to prevent those crimes from happening in the first place. 

Today, the U.S. has the dubious distinction of leading the industrialized world in per capita prison population, with more than one million men and women behind bars. The typical inmate in our prisons is minority, male, young and uneducated. More than 40 percent of inmates are illiterate; one-third were unemployed when arrested. This profile should tell us something important about the link between crime and lack of opportunity, between crime and lack of hope. 

Only when we begin to deal with the conditions that cause so many of our young people to turn to crime and violence will we begin to realize a less crime ridden society. 

Three Strikes And You’re Out Essay

We live in a world of laws, statutes, and regulations. This society has to enforce all of it in order to keep this country from going into complete chaos. Some laws can cause a large amount of controversy and debate over it. Specifically speaking, the Three Strikes and You’re Out Law. This one law has many people arguing for and against it. Statements from many saying that it is unjust and unfair, while others say that is what our society needs in order to keep this world safe from those career criminals. I strongly agree with the Three Strikes Law; although, the law should be altered in order for fit the different situations of individuals.
Three Strikes and You’re Out is what you would think you would only hear watching a baseball game and not is a court room. Unfortunately people that commit crimes and get punished don’t always stop and start being human to society. So exactly what is the Three Strikes Law? The Three strikes law sets a mandatory sentencing for 25 years to life in incarceration for repeat offenders. These offenders have been convicted of two violent crimes in the past, and any crime, whether a misdemeanor or felony to be convicted under the Three Strikes Law. This sets a standard on how much the courts can take of one person who has been convicted of violent crimes and petty crimes. There are many murders that could have been prevented if this law was enforced before the law was enforced.
What brought the idea of this law? A man named Mike Reynolds had a daughter that was going to turn 19 years old. She ended up being murdered on June 29, 1992, in Tower District here in Fresno by a criminal that should have been locked up; he was a repeat felon (Jones). Mike, like any father would be was angry with the fact of why wasn’t this guy locked up? He decided to take action and find a way for this to stop happening, so he spoke to law officials and legal experts to try and save the lives in the future (Jones). On March 7, 1994, Governor Pete Wilson signed the Three Strikes into a Law (Jones).
The Law has caused a huge controversial debate and there are people that personally disagree with the law. As in any controversial debate you would have the affirmative and the negative side. Let’s explore some of the positive facts that the Three Strikes Law that support the affirmative side. To start of with one popular note is that it keeps the career criminals, individuals who commit crime as a part of their lives, off the streets. Of course we want to keep the sex offenders, murderers, and rapist, off the street so we can worry that much less for the safety of ourselves and others. Another positive is that it is a deterrent. It is a very effective deterrent after the second conviction (Mersseli). If an offender is released from the second conviction, this law will deter them from any crime, whether it is minor or not. The thought of being sent to prison for 25 years to life is a pretty effective deterrent and will have that offender...

Loading: Checking Spelling

0%

Read more

Three Strikes Law Essay

1794 words - 7 pages Three Strikes Law Recidivism is a tendency to relapse into a former pattern of behavior or a tendency to return to criminal behavior. Many studies have been conducted about criminals who begin with petty crimes (misdemeanors) that repeat the same crimes or graduate to serious crimes (felonies). The fear of repeat offenders and the increase of recidivism ignited the federal and state governments to seek harsher ways to protect citizens’...

The California Three-Stike Law Essay

2842 words - 11 pages Officially known as Habitual offender laws; “Three Strikes” laws have become common place in 29 states(Chern) within the United States and the Federal Court system; these laws have been designed to counter criminal recidivism by incapacitation through the prison system. The idea behind the laws were to maximize the criminal justice systems deterrent and selective incapacitation effect, under this deterrence theory individuals would be...

comment of three strike law

1102 words - 4 pages Wld 57SHaohui Li2014/10/18Standard EnglishIn 1994, the California government enacted the "Three Strikes Law", whose name is derived from the baseball jargon, in order to contain the increasing tendency of criminals. "Three strikes and you are out" originally used in baseball game, and it means that if the batter fails to catch the...

Modification of the Three Strikes Rule

1950 words - 8 pages In the early nineteen-seventies, the state of California reported a radical increase in crime rates compared to the rest of the nation. In order to make California a crime free state, it began moving away from sentences that emphasized rehabilitation of criminals and started focusing more on retribution and prevention. This legislative movement was to extend jail sentence for certain crimes and transform felony sentences from undetermined to...

Sense and Nonsense about Crime and Drugs by Samuel Walker

1782 words - 7 pages Sense and Nonsense about Crime and Drugs by Samuel Walker Samuel Walker, author of Sense and Nonsense about Crime and Drugs, presented us in his book with forty-eight propositions that dealt with crime, drugs, and our efforts toward getting rid of these problems. A few of these propositions informed us on positive actions taking place in our criminal justice system, but the majority of them told us what was not working to fight crime...

Three Strikes: Harsher Sentencing of Repeat Felony Offender

1045 words - 4 pages Between 1993 and 1995, twenty four states enacted three strikes sentencing policy which calls for much harsher sentencing of repeat felony offender. Most sentences for these repeat offender called for a minimum punishment of a life sentence with possibility of release until twenty five years have been served (1 Marvell, Moody 89). These laws where created to target and punish what lawmakers believed to be the small percentage of criminals that...

Prop 66 3 Strikes Law

688 words - 3 pages This November an amended three strikes initiative will be placed on the ballot. Unfortunately, over the last decade, holding a statewide office in California required a pledge of allegiance to the state's grotesque Three-Strikes law. With a couch potato population afraid to walk outside their gated communities, "tough on crime" politicians flourished, taking victim's rights to extremes. Other state's have Three-Strikes laws, but California's...

Three Strikes law

1920 words - 8 pages Do “3 Strikes” Sentencing Laws Help To Reduce Serious Crime The three strikes laws is a law that was first used in the 1990’s and is an extension of the rational choice theory, which allows for a person to be sentenced to life in prison after their third strike. Should a minor crime receive the same punishment as a major crime? California’s three strikes law leaves no room for error in criminal activity for repeat offenders. Once you...

The Three Strikes Law is Lost in a Dessert         The

683 words - 3 pages The Three Strikes Law is Lost in a Dessert The 'three strikes' law has proven to be inadequate. It requires a huge amount of money to keep it in effect, while it mostly strikes non-violent criminals and causes early release of hard-core criminals. Thus, the law is ineffective...

Influence of Roman Catholic Church in Frank McCourt?s Life

819 words - 3 pages Influence of Roman Catholic Church in Frank McCourt’s Life      In the coming-of-age autobiographical novel Angela’s Ashes, Frank McCourt reveals that the Roman Catholic Church plays an extremely central role in his young life. The religious atmosphere in which he is raised acts as a huge part in his point of view, and even his name is reflective of his family’s beliefs. “Not until late December did they take Male to St....

Problems with the "Three Strikes" Laws

1536 words - 6 pages 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...