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.
There are certain crimes where both the recidivism rate and the risks to the public are very high. DWI/Drugged and pedophilia are probably at the top of the list. Two strikes for those. The least we can do is to protect the public from reoffenders.
That may be true, but possession of marijuana is not equivalent to murder, armed robbery, or violent assault.
The "three strikes" laws are flawed (as we have seen when applied in some states such as Missouri and Mississippi) when they result in life imprisonment without parole due to all three strikes having added up to possession of marijuana alone, or possession of marijuana and a couple of non-violent crimes committed many years earlier for which the perpetrator had already paid his debt to society.
Again... I'm not sure how you can see it as 'flawed' unless the offender is verifiably mentally challenged.
Of course possession isn't comparable with murder, but if possession is a stated violation of the law, people know it.
Millions upon millions of people have gone their entire lives with no interaction with law enforcement.
Again... I'm not sure how you can see it as 'flawed' unless the offender is verifiably mentally challenged.
Of course possession isn't comparable with murder, but if possession is a stated violation of the law, people know it.
Millions upon millions of people have gone their entire lives with no interaction with law enforcement.
I guess I'm of the school that teaches "the punishment must fit the crime." The laws on marijuana possession have been relaxed in many areas of our country right now, with laws regarding its use differing from state to state. So even in a state where marijuana is still outlawed, I just can't see a conviction for such as being any kind of "final strike" for enacting a life sentence with no hope of parole -- especially if the previous two strikes were only for marijuana use.
I am not a marijuana user, but I don't view others who either smoke pot or consume edibles to be a danger to me personally. I figure it's the business of the individual to decide what he puts into his own body. Additionally, our prisons are crowded enough already without continuing to fill them with convicted marijuana users.
I am ashamed that I live in the nation with the world's highest prison population. Highest in sheer numbers and highest in terms of percentage-of-population.
It is hard to be gung-ho proud of our nation when we screw-up so many simple things.
I did six years of my career working Law Enforcement duties. I have witnessed how 3-strike laws have changed Law Enforcement. You can be busted for something minor and totally stupid that everyone knows the judge will toss out. But once you are under arrest, then six other detectives will show up and destroy your home looking for any other infractions. And then later there will be a strategy meeting to decide which things to charge first. To build up the momentum in the courtroom.
If a neighbor complains about a domestic argument, the police will routinely arrest the male [because that is the stereotype and nobody will blink at the idea of the male being arrested], after that arrest is made then they search for any other crimes, Oops here is a bag of weed, oh look there in a closet is a firearm, and is that a photo of his children taking a bath together [nude minors] BINGO. When played out correctly in the courtroom, you can get a three-strikes ruling in a single bust.
...
Sorry, but they had multiple chances. It's about the Victims at that point. Specifically, ensuring that there won't be any more.
That sounds like a nice theory.
When I have seen it used, it was all a single arrest.
One arrest, a speeding ticket that led to searching the vehicle which led to drugs, which led to a firearm, and by the time they search your home, they will usually find something else.
The firearm was not illegal before the initial arrest.
The only way to incorporate the firearm into a chargeable offense is to wrap it into the drug charges.
People are sentenced on the 'tree-strikes' policy who have never been in jail before.
I think that context of the crime needs to be a factor. I recall outrage in the late 90's when "simple possession" of controlled substances was used as a third strike....and I think that was wrong. The couple instances that I am directly familiar with, I believe the authorities were grandstanding, and exploiting the law for their personal gratification.
But, I think with major crimes where violence or large denominations of inflicted loss are involved.....and an abundance of irrefutable proof exists, then yeah ...I think 3 strikes achieves a greater common good.
I'd also throw in that I think that 4th amendment protections would have to be rigidly enforced. None of this BS where "during a stop over a busted tail light, a "routine" search of the vehicle looking for weapons revealed that the parolee had a gram of controlled substances hidden under his seat"
I know that probable cause can often be manufactured after the fact of apprehension, and the judges will just look the other way, believing the end justifies the means....that stuff would need to go away before I'd see 3 strikes laws as "justice"
If we believe the hysteria over "gun violence", albeit without the unwillingness to use stop and frisk to find actual guns, guns anywhere are a danger. Or only if used by police officers in discharge of their duties?
While this is not a gun control thread, either gun possession is a crime or it isn't.
If you are talking about a combined total of three separate instances of murder and/or rape and/or any kind of severe physical abuse of a child and/or an action that involves the theft/fraud of more than $100,000, then I would be in favor of the death penalty. These people do not deserve to live at all, imo.
If you are talking about three felonies that don't involve any of the above, but have a combined total of three separate instances of putting someone in someone in the hospital for more than a week and/or involve illegal drug dealing or distribution of more than $100,000 worth of drugs and/or theft of more than $50,000 worth of cash or property, than I would be in favor of a prison sentence for life IF the person is over 21 years of age.
Btw, I am not going to argue with anyone about the above. The above is my OPINION.
If three felony arrests and convictions aren’t enough to convince or discourage you from committing crimes, maybe you don’t belong among the law abiding citizens of this country? How hard can it be to learn from the first two and get your act together?
If we believe the hysteria over "gun violence", albeit without the unwillingness to use stop and frisk to find actual guns, guns anywhere are a danger. Or only if used by police officers in discharge of their duties?
While this is not a gun control thread, either gun possession is a crime or it isn't.
Firearm possession is not a crime, until you have been arrested for drug possession, then it suddenly becomes a crime and you can be convicted of multiple crimes.
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.
