Analysis Of The Three Strikes Law

895 Words2 Pages

The Three Strikes Law
What happens when people continue doing bad things without learning their lesson? This is a question as a society we need to take into consideration. From the year 1991-1992 the violent crime rate in California increased by 14,000 (DisasterCenter). Due to these increasing crime rates the Three Strikes Law was created in 1994 in California and different versions were adopted into other states. This law was enacted to give repeat offenders longer sentences, sometimes sentences of 25 years to life. Since repeat offenders are hard to deal with due to their stoic attitude of jail time, this law was made to deal with returning prisoners who were now faced with spending extended time in prison for repeat offences(A Primer).This report will survey the different viewpoints that cover the Three Strikes Law. Such as the viewpoint of the system being unfair in relation to the long sentences for petty crimes and it being a financial strain that the government has to pay. I will also …show more content…

There are people like Romano who do not think that the punishment fits the crime in regards to this law such as shown by Leandro’s story. While people like Naomi Goodno states that the law is effective due to the decreasing crime rate, and the severe punishment helps motivate prisoners to be on their best behavior (Eckholm). There are also some individuals who believe that the cost of the prisons is not worth the effect they have (A Primer), while others believe the effect is quite worth the cost (Goodno). The Three Strikes Law was produced out of fear of a increasing crime rate and the thought of a prisoner that was undeterred at the thought of going to jail. However, certain costs weigh more or less in everyone’s mind. People always have different value systems, and we as a society need to consider the question of how we want to deal with repeat

Open Document