What are your thoughts on three strikes laws for criminals? (invasion, violent crime)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
People who commit non-violent crimes are unlikely to start physically harming people.
Social order is the same as always, there has never been a case where increasing the numbers of incarcerated people changed "social order", for every person you send to prison there are probably hundreds more who are breaking the law and not getting caught.
We can't, as a society afford to keep car thieves and shoplifters in prison for long periods of time, it's too expensive and offenders who enter prison committing low level property crimes are going to be confined in an environment where drugs are easier to get than on the streets, and where education consists of lessons in how to commit more serious (and lucrative crimes)
Before you start the 'tough on crime' thing, consider who is profiting from those tough laws, it's not your and I, it is law enforcement who can exploit more money from taxpayers so that they can "fight all these crimes", the companies who supply food to prisons (largely Aramark) who would probably go broke without that huge amount of revenue, and telephone companies who charge up to $20 for a VOIP call made from a prison or jail. Oh yeah....and contractors who are needed to build the additional prisons we will need to satisfy the lust for revenge.
Are you then willing to immediately compensate me for my loss in the above scenario? Will the government? That very same day? If so then feel free to let the perp go.
If not, then rational people see the long term effects a theft like that can have on the victim.
People talk about tax payer money this, tax payer money that, and yet I never see any significant difference in the percentage of my income I owe from one year to another, or from one presidential/gubernatorial administration to another.
It's an odd kind of math where 50K divided among millions of people comes out the same as someone stealing a thousand from one person directly. Maybe if we don't arrest him, my state tax return will suddenly go up by 1K?
"Hey, fellas! They didn't incarcerate Joe! Let the savings be distributed to everyone!"
If you're so concerned about tax dollars that you think penalizing crime is a waste, maybe lobby to cut spending on things that actually are wasteful to make up for it.
But if you want no jail for thieves, then maybe you're on the city council in San Francisco, where someone can load up on a cart full of merchandise and just walk out of the store whistling Dixie
Then wonder WHY retailers are packing up and moving out in mass.
"Those big mean business owners are making this a retail desert. It's all their fault! That's racist! Waaah! WAAAAH! WAAAAH! Mommy!"
You can choose your actions, but you can't choose the consequences.
Retailers aren't packing up and moving out in mass. The scary stories about Walgreens fleeing San Francisco has been debunked. They closed some stores because of low sales for the past several years, the closings have been in the works, they announced it to their shareholders in 2017. https://48hills.org/2021/10/no-walgr...f-shoplifting/
In our society, we don't speculate on how many crimes someone may have committed. We demand that if someone is charged with a crime it be proven in court either by a trial or a guilty plea. Until one of those things happen I refuse to say someone like this has committed a bunch of additional crimes. It may have happened. It may not have.
I've been the victim of theft as have many people in my community. We don't like it. There are probably ways to prevent it, but the cost of those ways has to be factored into it. Prison at $50,000 a year per inmate is an extremely expensive way to deal with crime. Ultimately, most people in my community would choose to take the risk of being further victimized than to have to spend that much to incarcerate someone. How do I know this? Utah has almost the lowest incarceration rate in the western United States. That is the system we have opted for.
Theft is unpleasant, but most people can overcome it. We work a few hours more. We make sure our possessions are locked up next time. We use more common sense. Stores could prevent many thefts if they wanted too. The configuration of a store could be changed. Merchandise could be put under lock and key and only taken out when someone asks to see it. People in the store could fetch items for us instead of us picking them up off the shelves. Why do stores do business the way they currently do? Its really very simple. The store management realizes that more products are sold when customers can readily pick them up, examine them, and place them in a shopping cart. I understand the decision of store management. However, the point is that they have weighed the potential cost of retail theft against more security and have opted to keep things the way they are and deal with the losses from retail theft. It is a totally sustainable situation.
There has always been theft. There always will be theft. I submit that there is little serious disruption to the social order because of theft. Its something we expect. Its something our society has mechanisms for dealing with.
The idea of costing society grossly more than a thief has taken by incarcerating him/her for life is just dumb. No other way to put it.
So a guy steals $1000 worth of merchandise three times for a total of $3,000.00.
The taxpayers are the real victims here with a three strike law. We get to pay $50,000 a year to incarcerate a thirty year old offender for a fifty year life span. That's $1,500,000.
Maybe you can't do cost benefit analysis. I can. I don't want my tax dollars spent on your idea of retribution.
It isn't worth putting someone in jail for life that does something on that order. You cannot see it. Rational people can.
So a cost benefit analysis should show a negative cost to taxpayers before we throw criminals in prisons? I'm sorry but if you've been a victim of a crime then I would imagine you may feel differently and if you have been and you're that forgiving to them then great on you. But you certainly do not speak for all in matters such as these. Someone caught on the 3rd theft means they got away with many other thefts and are now paying for only their 3rd offense. I worked hard for everything I own and I'll be damed if I want a local punk to make off with what is mine.
So a cost benefit analysis should show a negative cost to taxpayers before we throw criminals in prisons? I'm sorry but if you've been a victim of a crime then I would imagine you may feel differently and if you have been and you're that forgiving to them then great on you. But you certainly do not speak for all in matters such as these. Someone caught on the 3rd theft means they got away with many other thefts and are now paying for only their 3rd offense. I worked hard for everything I own and I'll be damed if I want a local punk to make off with what is mine.
I understand your point but that's the problem. You can't base public policy decisions off your personal feelings. I've been the victim of crime (robbed at gunpoint in my early 20s). Trust me, I wanted to retaliate but luckily had relatives who convinced me otherwise.
When crimes are committed it is up to the society to make sounds decisions on the punishment against the perpetrator, crime prevention, and bringing restitution to the victims. It's a balancing act. Making it personal simply clouts judgments and leads to worse issues along with money drain. Do you consider the victims yes, but do you let it form the basis of your entire decision no.
So a cost benefit analysis should show a negative cost to taxpayers before we throw criminals in prisons? I'm sorry but if you've been a victim of a crime then I would imagine you may feel differently and if you have been and you're that forgiving to them then great on you. But you certainly do not speak for all in matters such as these. Someone caught on the 3rd theft means they got away with many other thefts and are now paying for only their 3rd offense. I worked hard for everything I own and I'll be damed if I want a local punk to make off with what is mine.
I have been the victim of more than one theft and I will stand by everything I said. Proportionate and rational punishment is not putting even a repeat thief in prison for life.
I can possibly imagine an exception where the theft is some kind of huge con game where the perpetrator, like Bernie Madoff, steals millions from vulnerable people. We are not talking though about a drug addict who steals $1,000 or less in property three times.
So a cost benefit analysis should show a negative cost to taxpayers before we throw criminals in prisons? I'm sorry but if you've been a victim of a crime then I would imagine you may feel differently and if you have been and you're that forgiving to them then great on you. But you certainly do not speak for all in matters such as these. Someone caught on the 3rd theft means they got away with many other thefts and are now paying for only their 3rd offense.
That's not what he's saying. He is saying that cost-benefit needs to be factored into the equation, as well as many other factors, which the criminal statutes do take into consideration, as well as do sentencing guidelines. There's a reason that someone that steals a bike on a street will be charged and sentenced differently than someone that breaks into a dwelling with a crowbar to steal a bike; there's reason that someone that shoplifts a $300 item will be charged and sentenced differently than someone that sticks up a gas station for $300.
And I have been the victim of theft and vandalism and assault, thankfully nothing serious or violent. The vandal is the one I'm still the most upset about, I'd advocate Singapore style justice for that, but I digress.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Countryfreak
I worked hard for everything I own and I'll be damed if I want a local punk to make off with what is mine.
But you're cool with the government taxing what you've worked hard for to feed and clothe the local punk the rest of his life? No thanks, the guy needs to go to jail but not forever.
I will agree that Three Strikes and heading to prison for what may be life should be reserved for he worst of the worst. But small time thieves are a drain on society as well. While I only did 10 years in uniform as a police officer before moving to another career I can recall one shop owner tell me he will no longer prosecute for shoplifting. I arrested one guy who they had evidence on was stealing from them on a very regular basis. His previous arrest saw him convicted with the order to stay out of that store. I believe the guy served one day in jail. When I pulled his record he had maybe a dozen or so arrests and convictions for theft amongst many other criminal convictions. But in this one case he plead not guilty but was found guilty after a brief trial. Verdict: One day in jail. Store owner said he was done and he would take matters into his own hands in the future. I never heard what actions he ever took but I can certainly understand his frustrations.
I will agree that Three Strikes and heading to prison for what may be life should be reserved for he worst of the worst. But small time thieves are a drain on society as well. While I only did 10 years in uniform as a police officer before moving to another career I can recall one shop owner tell me he will no longer prosecute for shoplifting. I arrested one guy who they had evidence on was stealing from them on a very regular basis. His previous arrest saw him convicted with the order to stay out of that store. I believe the guy served one day in jail. When I pulled his record he had maybe a dozen or so arrests and convictions for theft amongst many other criminal convictions. But in this one case he plead not guilty but was found guilty after a brief trial. Verdict: One day in jail. Store owner said he was done and he would take matters into his own hands in the future. I never heard what actions he ever took but I can certainly understand his frustrations.
Many of us are frustrated by crime. I had a guy break into my office and steal money. However, that was not the worst of it. He vandalized the office. He deliberately broke personal items that had a lot of emotional significance to those of us who worked t here. He took a fire extinguisher and sprayed its contents in a number of rooms.
Because of a past criminal record, he was sentenced to served an indeterminate term of 1-5 years in prison. I felt that was appropriate.
I would never have put him there though simply because of the money he took from us. Even after all he did, I would not feel a life sentence was appropriate either. Proportionality and cost v. benefits remain an important part of the calculation.
That's completely false! In fact, crime has gone down. There is also no evidence that mass incarceration makes us any safer. With 25% of the world's inmates, while we're only 5% of the world population, we should be super safe. That's clearly not the case.
That crime is on the rise or the world becoming more dangerous is a myth. It's been well debunked.
I don't know that I've read of a single major metropolitan area that hasn't experienced a significant rise in crime in the last two years.
As to whether 'mass incarceration' makes us safer, there's absolute 100% undeniable proof that when Joe Bad Guy goes away for life the third time he rapes somebody, he's not going to be raping anyone else besides another inmate. I feel safer.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
