Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Problems with the three strikes legislation
Critical analysis on three strikes law
3 strikes law flaws
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Problems with the three strikes legislation
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’ safety. Mike Reynolds a photographer whose daughter, Kimber, was murdered in1992 during a purse snatching incident introduced the Three Strikes Law in 1993. State legislators did consider and rejected this law because they believed the measures were harsh and costly. However, the Three Strikes Law received national attention from a second incident, the 1993 kidnapping of Polly Klaas from her Petaluma home. Polly was kidnapped and murdered by Richard Allen Davis who was on parole during this time. Because of this second incident, in January 1994 during President Clinton’s State of the Union Address, he requested for the enactment of a federal Three Strikes Law. In March 1994, California passed the Three Strikes bill. “Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy criticized the politics surrounding the enactment of the Three Strikes Law of California’s famous recidivist sentencing scheme as ‘sick’” (Romano, 2010). Although the Three Strikes Law centers on California, Washington was the first state to adopt the law while California followed with a broader version. According to Dickey and Hollenhorst (1999), “23 states and the federal government adopted some form of “three strikes and you’re out” law intending to target repeat violent offenders (p.1). The law varies among states, but the intent i... ... middle of paper ... ... of offenders convicted on a second strike and 44 percent of those convicted on a third strike” (p. 10). Overcrowding Conclusion Generally, the Three Strikes Law is effective. It has met the goals of deterrence and incapacitation of career criminals without putting a strain on state budgets and overcrowding prisons. The law has progressed to ensure that it targets only career criminals. Each state has its own methods of exercising preferences to ensure the law is fairly applied. The Three Strikes Law focuses on individuals and determines whether they receive longer sentencing because of their past criminal conduct. Justice O’Connor explained, “Recidivism is a serious public safety concern in California and throughout the nation” (Goodno, 2007). The law was enacted to handle this concern, and currently, the law is showing that it is doing its job.
Increased tensions during the 1960s in the context of the Civil Rights Movement started to cause an increase in crime, sparking a newfound belief in incarcerating the masses to prevent more crime from occurring. During the 1970s, the likelihood of being incarcerated increased for nearly every citizen, especially low-level offenders. Clear and Frost thoroughly explain that the Punishment Imperative in the 1980s was caused by changes in government “policies and practices associated with the increasingly ubiquitous War on Drugs” (31). Changes in sentencing guidelines, mandatory minimum sentences, and three strikes legislation were though to be initially helpful in decreasing the rate of incarceration, but they proved to do the exact opposite. Policies also regarding reentry into society, access to education, public housing, and child custody for ex-convicts continued to play a major role in the increase in incarceration because newly released convicts had an extremely difficult time reintegrating into society. Clear and Frost continue to argue their point as they reach incapacitation in the 1990s, where they discuss how the government focused generally on increasing the lengths of stay within prisons instead of increasing the amount of people being incarcerated. Clear and Frost use quantitative data to explain the government policy called
The assumption that all three-time offenders are incorrigible criminals is an oversimplification of a more complex problem. Three-strikes is based on this assumption that a few extreme cases are representative of all criminals. Mimi Silbert points...
The driving force behind "three-strikes" legislation in Washington, were politicians wanting to "get tough on crime". The reasoning behind the law was to reduce recidivism and get violent offenders off the street. I think that the legislation was merely a response to public outcry rather than a well thought out strategy to actually reduce crime. Advocates say that after "three-strikes" laws were adopted across the country there was a drastic reduction in crime in general. They also argue that once a person has committed a his second "strike" and knows that he faces a life sentence if convicted again will think twice before committing another crime. These arguments are fallacies. Finally what supporters fail to point out is that these three-strike laws target minorities over whites in a severely disproportionate amount.
The deterrent effect of three strikes law. FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, 68, 6-11. Tischler, E. (1999, Feburary). Three strikes striking out?
Because these changes in sentencing policy have created greater prison populations, laws like the Three Strike Policy have parole officers with a heavier burden. This increased work load transformed the focus of parole supervisors from rehabilitation of ex offenders, to law enforcement. (Travis 241) New modes of surveillance were introduced and by 1997, the rate of successful reentry was at a low of 44%— successful reintegration back into society was not the norm for most individuals. (Austin
middle of paper ... ... For that, it is hard to say whether it is effective in the United States in its current state. It might just be a problem with implementation. Conclusion: All in all, intermediate sanctions have been shown to be an effective alternative to prison.
According to the National Institute of Justice, recidivism is one of the most fundamental concepts in criminal justice. The NIJ defines recidivism as a person’s relapse into criminal behavior, often after receiving sanctions or undergoing intervention for a previous crime. Recidivism is often utilized in evaluating prisons effectiveness in crime control. Reducing recidivism is crucial for probation, parole and to the correctional system overall.
9. Sherman L., Gottfredson D., MacKenzie D., Eck J., Reuter P., Bushway S. Preventing Crime: What Works, What Doesn't, What's Promising. A Report to the United States Congress. College Park, MD: University of Maryland, Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice, 1997.
More than half of prisoners reoffend within at least three years of leaving prison. Those who reoffend tend to have more severe and more aggressive offenses than previously. A man by the name of Brandy Lee has shown that by having a very strict program in prisons, violent offenders in San Francisco jails reduced the amount of violence in jails. The program also helped to reduce the rate of violent re-offences after leaving the jail by over 50 percent.
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 particular.(Auerhahn, p.55)
This research seeks to establish whether making the penalty stiff will work in repeating repeat and future offenders. This research is tied to a larger theory that harsh punishments act as a deterrent to crime. They work by making people not commit a crime for fear of the punishment that is going to follow. This research is applicable across many facets of crimes that are rampant. It is going to help identify whether enacting stricter laws and enforcing them helps in reducing the relate...
The purpose behind the original construction of prisons and jails were to segregate offenders from the rest of society, thus rehabilitating them through means of punishment. However, the strict “tough on crime” punishment mentality that resulted from the “War on Drugs” movement in the 1980’s, is believed to be one of the largest contributors to rising mass incarceration and recidivism rates exhausting government funds and taxpayer money. The National Institute of Justice reports that “over 75% of released inmates are re-incarcerated within five years of being discharged”, and assert that “the high re-offending rate is due to many U.S. prisons focusing on punishment, rather than on rehabilitation”
Juvenile crime in the United States is ballooning out of control along with adult crimes, and politicians and law enforcement officials don’t seem to be able to do anything about it. Despite tougher sentencing laws, longer probation terms, and all other efforts of lawmakers, the crime and recidivism rates in our country can’t be reduced. The failure of these recent measures along with new research and studies by county juvenile delinquency programs point to the only real cure to the U.S.’s crime problem: prevention programs. The rising crime rates in the United States are of much worry to most of the U.S.’s citizens, and seems to be gaining a sense of urgency. Crime ranks highest in nationwide polls as Americans’ biggest concern (Daltry 22). For good reason- twice as many people have been victims of crimes in the 1990s as in the 1970s (Betts 36). Four times as many people under the age of eighteen were arrested for homicide with a handgun in 1993 than in 1983 (Schiraldi 11A). These problems don’t have a quick fix solution, or even an answer that everyone can agree on. A study by the Campaign for an Effective Crime Policy has found no deterrent effects of the “Three Strikes and You’re Out” law recently put into effect by politicians (Feinsilber 1A). It has been agreed however that there is not much hope of rehabilitating criminals once started on a life of crime. Criminologist David Kuzmeski sums up this feeling by saying, “If society wants to protect itself from violent criminals, the best way it can do it is lock them up until they are over thirty years of age.... I am not aware of any treatment that has been particularly successful.” The problem with his plan is that our country simply doesn’t have the jail space, or money to ...
The rate of repeat offenders is rising and the need to suppress this rate should be attended to immediately. Statistics supports the implementation of stricter rules, as the continual rate of the repeat offenders increases.
The United States criminal justice system is an ever-changing system that is based on the opinions and ideas of the public. Many of the policies today were established in direct response to polarizing events and generational shifts in ideology. In order to maintain public safety and punish those who break these laws, law enforcement officers arrest offenders and a judge or a group of the law offender’s peers judge their innocence. If found guilty, these individuals are sentenced for a predetermined amount of time in prison and are eventually, evaluated for early release through probation. While on probation, the individual is reintegrated into their community, with restrict limitations that are established for safety. In theory, this system