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.
We are speaking on long term prison sentences that are more felony then misdemeanors. At least that's how I'm translating it.
Letting Johnny get a DUI, kill little Sally. Do seven years for veh. Homicide. Gets out and does it again.
We aren't talking about Bubba repeatedly stealing a candy bar and being labeled a thief ...
My citizen concern is the realistic fact that so many plea deals are done where we DO not have a clear baseline . Way too many folks that ARE repeat offenders , dodge it by pleading to a lesser offense .
Actually had a case in my town. 17 years ago , guy was sentenced to rape of a minor.
Did his time.
Five years ago, he was charged with rape of a minor. He plea dealed down to soliciting a minor. The family of this minor was rebuffed by this so called justice system. I'd rather that guy stay out of our community.
It would really help if instead of this gross minimizing of a persons crime by , by-passing justice. We can put them in confinement and serve the actual time. Ten years, get out after 3. Makes no sense.
I am not sure what any of this has to do with a three strikes rule. In the US, everyone has the presumption of innocence, so three strikes does nothing if the prosecution isn’t able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant actually committed a crime. It sounds like in the case you mentioned, they could not prove rape of a minor and had to go with soliciting.
FWIW, in many places, a felony is simply a crime that is punishable by a year or more in prison. Even though that is not a long time, actually being convicted of a felony has a huge effect on people in terms of being able to find jobs and places to live.
I heard this line come up in other postings, so I'm going to ask a question to posters who don't mind paying more and more tax dollars to the prison system. Are you just as willing to support food stamps, and other forms of welfare? An argument could be made for such programs being an endless money pit, but an argument could also be made that they reduce crime. After all, if I'm starving, I'm going to be much more likely to steal or get into drugs.
Yes I am. I am all in for helping those in need and as a deacon for my church I am part of helping those in need. But I also believe I am sick and tired of criminals terrorizing those out here and those folks need to feel safe in their homes and so on.
I am not sure what any of this has to do with a three strikes rule. In the US, everyone has the presumption of innocence, so three strikes does nothing if the prosecution isn’t able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant actually committed a crime. It sounds like in the case you mentioned, they could not prove rape of a minor and had to go with soliciting.
FWIW, in many places, a felony is simply a crime that is punishable by a year or more in prison. Even though that is not a long time, actually being convicted of a felony has a huge effect on people in terms of being able to find jobs and places to live.
More and more employers are now hiring convicted felons but of course it depends on what the original charge was. The more minor ones are being overlooked as they need workers. Covid played a big role in this. Maybe not necessarily the higher paying career jobs but there are some good paying jobs nonetheless. I saw one plumber offering to train someone and start them at $25 an hour with benefits to start after 30 days and they made it clear felons could apply.
I am not insinuating anything. I am providing an example. The majority of things people keep mentioning are misdemeanors that aren't included in the first place.
In an earlier post I spelled out my ideal version of a three strikes law that is actually more lenient than what participating states currently have. But there is a reason for it.
Again, public interest needs to be kept in mind. Cost cannot override that.
My point is that some states have made a third DUI offense, possession of small quantities of methamphetamines or narcotics, and a third offense of retail theft a felony. So, they would qualify under a three strikes law that is not limited to violent felonies.
The "public interest" is not in incarcerating those I have just described for the rest of their lives.
I am not insinuating anything. I am providing an example. The majority of things people keep mentioning are misdemeanors that aren't included in the first place.
In an earlier post I spelled out my ideal version of a three strikes law that is actually more lenient than what participating states currently have. But there is a reason for it.
Again, public interest needs to be kept in mind. Cost cannot override that.
You're providing an example that's already defacto handled by the law. Carjacking, just once, is going to carry a heavy prison sentence. Do it a second time and you're in for longer. So now you're talking about someone that's spent the better part of two decades of their life locked up by the time they have the opportunity to offend the third time. If they offend a third time, they're going away, if not a life sentence, only to be released as an old man.
It should depend on the crimes. A man here in Missouri was sentenced to 20 to life for 3 convictions of selling pot . And an undercover cop encouraged him to sell it the third time.
Source? That's awful.
As far as the thread topic, violent felonies and certain others ABSOLUTELY yes, 3 strike laws I am for and I'm glad they're so harsh. I'm also glad gun crimes are so harsh. (I own a million before anyone says anything lol)
It should depend on the crimes. A man here in Missouri was sentenced to 20 to life for 3 convictions of selling pot . And an undercover cop encouraged him to sell it the third time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mister 7
Source? That's awful.
As far as the thread topic, violent felonies and certain others ABSOLUTELY yes, 3 strike laws I am for and I'm glad they're so harsh. I'm also glad gun crimes are so harsh. (I own a million before anyone says anything lol)
The Missouri man has since been released from prison, with the repeal of Missouri's "three strikes" law.
There was also a Mississippi man who was sentenced to life imprisonment without parole after a pot bust, but it wasn't only because of the pot that he received that sentence. His previous two convictions were for burglary and unlawful possession of a firearm.
Regardless of his "three strikes," life imprisonment without parole still sounds like an excessive sentence when the deciding crime that puts him over the limit is possession of marijuana.
I must vehemently disagree that a third offense of DUI should not be included. I find it astonishing that in most states, a first offense is only a misdemeanor.
I must vehemently disagree that a third offense of DUI should not be included. I find it astonishing that in most states, a first offense is only a misdemeanor.
Because there is a distinct possibility of killing someone, or multiple someones, every single time you do it.
But hey, let's wait until that actually happens, on their 8th DUI, before we make it a serious charge, eh?
Or their 8th DUI that we KNOW of.
Count the times that they didn't crash or get pulled over on their way home, and it could be their 88th DUI.
That's a point that's been mentioned multiple times in this thread.
The third strike is only the third time they got caught. Few criminals are dumb enough or unlucky enough to commit only 3 crimes in their life, all of them felonies, and get caught the first 3 times.
By the time someone gets their third strike, there are likely countless other offenses with a laundry list of victims for which there was no justice.
So yeah, once the third strike is proven beyond a shadow of a doubt, I say put them away for life for what we know they did, and ad a second life sentence for what they probably did.
Well put.
As to the folks using selling pot as an example... there is NO ONE selling pot anywhere in this country that doesn't know they're not supposed to.
As to the folks using selling pot as an example... there is NO ONE selling pot anywhere in this country that doesn't know they're not supposed to.
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.
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.
