Are you or would you be in favor of the 3 strike law in your state or country, why, why not?

[Hispanic-Cool-Guy]

For those of you that aren't familiar with the law, after a person has been convicted of 3 in particular violent or serious felonies they automatically receive a life prison sentence.

[Wraven]

Just be aware life isn't really 100 years. It's generally 40, and in most states 3 strike rules of life are typically parolled after 5 - 10 years depending on the severity of the crime.

I honestly don't think it should be a baseball terminology to define a law based like this.

Severity of felonies should come with a incremental penalty for doing them again, not a end all treatment for something as trivial as indecent exposure.

In a perfect perfect world there wouldn't be crime, but in a perfect world many of these crimes need too be isolated to faculties of their own classification.

Throwing a streaker into a prison with hardened killers, rapists, and torturers isn't probably the best place to bring them back to a societies level of normal.

[DryGermanGuy]

@Hispanic-Cool-Guy

You did not fully understand what the three-strikes law means. It actually means that after TWO serious offenses a THIRD felony (whatever it is) will hand you a lifetime sentence in prison.

I remember a case in California, where a guy received life because his third offense was stealing a slice of pizza from a family at a beach barbecue. This could have been a misdemeanor, but the prosecutor piled aggravating charges on top by presenting the victims as "scarred for life".

[StevieNix]

The three strikes rule isn't really about putting someone in prison for life. This three strikes rule was invented to get criminals to leave your state after the second strike. No State wants to house you for the rest of your life at about $50,000 per year.

It's kind of like how cities will give free bus ticket rides to the homeless, to get them out of their city.

[MikeInHawaii]

They give the homeless plane tickets to Hawaii.

[StevieNix]

Good idea. It's not like they're going to jump on a Greyhound bus and leave Hawaii.

[MikeInHawaii]

Horrible idea. It’s like me walking my St. Bernard in your yard.

[StevieNix]

I meant that tongue-in-cheek. In my state one city will bus the homeless to another city, and then that City will bus them back. It's just like a ping pong match. That's why I thought flying them to an island would be better. Maybe we can fly them to cuba.

[MikeInHawaii]

Now there’s an idea! We can also send all the young liberals who think socialism is a good idea!

[StevieNix]

They'd need in heaven there.

[letuswaltzforthedead]

sounds like a waste of taxpayer money. shouldn't a punishment be in accordance with the crime, not some arbitrary law?

[MikeInHawaii]

On the “Hawaii’s Most Wanted” segment of the news, there have been people with over 100 convictions wanted for “violating the terms of his/her probation.” How do you suggest keeping them from reoffending?

One guy had 37 burglary convictions. Keep in mind the Honolulu police took 3,600 burglary reports last year and made 120 arrests. About 2/3 of those arrested get convicted. Even if only 10% of burglaries go unreported, each conviction easily represents 50 burglaries.

So a man with 37 convictions has probably committed around 1,850 burglaries. The average burglary costs $2,500 in property damage and lost items. So this ass hat has cost society $4.5 million while not in prison. Locking him up for life would have been taxpayer money well spent.

[AviatorTom]

No, it's been tried in several US states, and has not proven to be of any significant benefit. It encourages plea bargaining to less serious crimes on serious crimes so as not to reach three strikes, and sometimes the three strikes, together, don't make a situation worthy of life in prison, as exemplified in this question's image.

States have abandoned the "three strikes" rule and, instead, authorize justices to use the past criminal record of an individual (in particular, a "repeat offender") in determining an appropriate sentence for the crime.

[RealMarek]

No. Punishment should be proportionate to the crime and consistently applied.

[Hispanic-Cool-Guy]

I 100% agree with you.

[RealMarek]

Our problem is a lack of consistent, fair enforcement. We play a game of pleading people out because they can’t afford quality legal representation and the system is overburdened with cases. This leads to shoddy police work and case prep. The unsolved crime rate in the US is appalling. The big picture of policies that gradually impoverish most of the country, create instability in the job market, prevent a sense of community from developing, and encourage many social ills ensure crime will be a problem. If we don’t find a way to restore genuine community and allow people to have gainful employment without being in the elite or living in a nomadic way, we will not fix the justice system.

[ArtemisSilver]

Honestly it should be on the second offense. I get giving people a second chance, but if they reoffend within a few years of release then they should be punished harshly.

I also think that anyone facing a sentence of over five years should be given the option to spare the government the cost of housing them and opt for execution by hanging or firing squad. Perhaps a portion of the savings could be passed along to compensate victims.

[Chazmatazz269]

I think i’d be in favor. You could “accidentally” end up wrong place and wrong time ONCE. But especially given parole restrictions, two and three times is highly unlikely. But i’d push the penalty up to death, within 90 days of final conviction.

[jahaims]

Or they could just sentence them to the appropriate prison time in the first place. Like never letting a sex offender or murdering out. Some people get out after only 12 years for murder.

[MikeInHawaii]

Georgia had a two strike law for violent felonies and I’m okay with that. Certain crimes like pimping or child molestation, I’m okay with “one and done” or the death penalty.

[IceCreamSandwich]

No. Not in favor of any "automatics" in law enforcement or punishment

[jhl_x]

No. The three-strike law should punish criminals with the death penalty. It's a waste of taxpayer money to keep them alive with no purpose.

[KrakenAttackin]

No. Three strike laws have filled the prisons. Although there are a lot of shitty judges I do think courts should have discretion.

[WhiteBoyChill]

I dont believe violent criminals should have 3 chances to begin with

[StevieNix]

I get a kick out of people who save it America has too many people in prison. First of all, American prisons are like country clubs. Second of all, China probably doesn't have a very big prison population because they just blow your brains out.

[WhiteBoyChill]

@StevieNix We’re way too soft on crime to be honest

[exitseven]

If somebody does not stop after three times they will never stop and and need to be locked up where they cannot hurt anyone else,.

[Anonymous]

When it comes to murder excluding self defense (and abortion i do not classify as such), one conviction or even a murder attempt is enough to lock up and enslave the murderer.

[Pudsmucker]

I like the three strike laws and you're out. I've seen it work it's been excellent.

[007kingifrit]

3 strikes is more than enough, how many second chances should a person get

[Alwayreckles93]

No not at all.

[kao118]

In favour it’s probably for the best

[AFretiredTXn]

Yes definitely.