criminal theories
“Three Strikes You’re Out, A LAW GONE BAD”
Victor K. Primas
Kaplan University
CJ526: Academic and Professional Communications in Public Safety
Prof: Gary Kowaluk
November 11, 2013
Supporters of the Three Strikes claim that the law is intended to protect people for the most viscous of criminals, but many who have fell prey to this law has committed the lowest of crime. This law cost the taxpayers billions of dollars each year. I believe that in the current state of the United States economy, it cannot be maintained as written. Many Americans believe that the law states that the punishment must fit the crime. I believe that individuals should not be imprisoned for life for petty crimes such as shop lifting and other small crimes. This principle, known as "proportionality," is expressed in the Eighth Amendment to the Bill of Rights: "Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted. The rule of all crimes sentence under one law is not a good practice, and should be revamped.
So many people in charge want to make simple solutions without putting much thought into it. This 3 strike law doesn't always work out. I remember the story of the guy who had 2 strikes already against him, and he took someone’s pizza and got life. There are a lot of stories like that, which is why from what I heard, they are thinking about making an adjustment to that law. I think that lengthy prison sentences do reduce the amount of crime in our society, but I also feel it is unfair to the prisoners. I think this because prison is not a desirable place to be in so people choose to avoid going there by not committing crimes. Therefore, fewer crimes are committed. I feel that lengthy prison sentences are unfair to those being punished for their crimes. It is unfair to take away someone's right to freedom and basically steal the remainder of their lives in prison, rotting away. I believe everyone
Victor K. Primas
Kaplan University
CJ526: Academic and Professional Communications in Public Safety
Prof: Gary Kowaluk
November 11, 2013
Supporters of the Three Strikes claim that the law is intended to protect people for the most viscous of criminals, but many who have fell prey to this law has committed the lowest of crime. This law cost the taxpayers billions of dollars each year. I believe that in the current state of the United States economy, it cannot be maintained as written. Many Americans believe that the law states that the punishment must fit the crime. I believe that individuals should not be imprisoned for life for petty crimes such as shop lifting and other small crimes. This principle, known as "proportionality," is expressed in the Eighth Amendment to the Bill of Rights: "Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted. The rule of all crimes sentence under one law is not a good practice, and should be revamped.
So many people in charge want to make simple solutions without putting much thought into it. This 3 strike law doesn't always work out. I remember the story of the guy who had 2 strikes already against him, and he took someone’s pizza and got life. There are a lot of stories like that, which is why from what I heard, they are thinking about making an adjustment to that law. I think that lengthy prison sentences do reduce the amount of crime in our society, but I also feel it is unfair to the prisoners. I think this because prison is not a desirable place to be in so people choose to avoid going there by not committing crimes. Therefore, fewer crimes are committed. I feel that lengthy prison sentences are unfair to those being punished for their crimes. It is unfair to take away someone's right to freedom and basically steal the remainder of their lives in prison, rotting away. I believe everyone