3 Strikes??

[ToNe1904]

Jus curious what yall think of this shit. For those who dont know, The 3-strikes law was basically started in California...but has now spread to alot of other states. What it is, is that when u are caught for 3 felonies...on yur 3rd time, u receive tha maximum sentence possible. I believe on yur third, even a misdemeanor will be considered a felony. The supreme court is in tha process of reveiwing tha law to see whether or not this is cruel and unusual punishment. It might not sound like a bad law at first, but thas only for people who commit MAJOR crimes. Theres a case of a man in California who is sentenced to 25 yrs in prison. His 3 crimes. When he was 18 he stole sum video tapes from a Blockbuster. He later was arrested for Drug Possession (marijuana), and his last conviction was for stealing sum golf clubs. Now, i dont think that warrants 25 yrs in prison...but thats how the 3 strikes law works. There are murderers who get out of prison in less then 25 yrs. Theres anotha case that was similar to this one, where the man had 2 small crimes...and his 3rd crime, was stealing a slice of pizza...he received 25yrs to life. Now, those who justify this law say that it is in place to be able to go after the "repeat offenders". Well, the "repeat offenders" are typically poor people. White collar crimes are less likely to be caught more then once. If a business man embezzles 3 million dollars frum a corporation, he only has to do that once. However the poor man who steals 200 dollars, is much more likely to steal again...because 200 dollars gets u nowhere. Not to mention, the federal law states that for theft...a felony is anything over 500 dollars. In California, its anything over 100 dollars. This law is completely fucked up. I mean, i would understand slightly...if it actually worked. but it doesnt. Crime in california is not THAT much better. The only thing this law has done, is put more people in jail. And u know who pays for that...tha taxpayers. The average inmate casts 25,000 dollars a year to be in prison. And to show how fucked up Californias priorities are...we spend 6 billion dollars a year on prisons...and around 4 billion on schools. Its no wonder we have the most crowded jails...and the worst schools in the country. This law to me, is jus a way to make rich people feel safe from poor people. Where better then California to have a law like this...where therez a HUGE disparity frum the rich and poor.

[Trauma-san]

Well, I got a couple feelin's about this.

1st off, the law only giving people the minimum sentence, then letting them off after 50% served is B.S.  They oughta make it, if you're sentenced to 5  years, you do 5 years.  If your sentenced to life, you do life.  None of this 'bend the system' stuff.

2nd off, if they ARE going to do it the way they're doing it now (letting people off with 50% served, giving minimum sentences, etc.) then the 3 strikes law is b.s., because the only reason they're doing it is because of the criminal's past, which is unconstitutional, since you're basically trying him twice (it's like double jeapordy).  Once they've served their sentence, that oughta not be anybody's business from then on out, as far as the courts go.  Jail sentences are designed as punishment; once you've served 5 years for theft, you shouldn't have to be punished again for that crime if you've already been punished for it.

In my world, I'd get rid of the 3 strikes law, and also get rid of the 50% off for good behaviour law.  What you're sentenced to is what you do.  Minimum/Maximum sentences I'd leave, because if someone steals something accidentally, and someone plots it out and beats someone up, maybe he should get the max, while the other guy gets the min.  

[Trauma-san]

BTW, things like repeat rape offenses would still be properly punished in my system, because if someone was sentenced to 30 years for rape, he'd serve 30, not 15, then get out, and rape again.  That's why the '3 strikes' law was created in the first place, mainly rape, robbery, repeat offender people.  If they would get rid of the 50% off for good behaviour rule, people convicted wouldn't be on the streets to repeat the offense.  

To fund the prisons, they oughta make the inmates work, too, I think.  They could set up factories in the pen, and sell the things that are made.  Like why are we buying labor from japan and china, when we got 2-3 million people twiddling their thumbs in their prison cells 20 hours a day?  All the crap we import from other countries could be made right here, it would fund the prisons, and ease the tax burden on the citizens.

[ToNe1904]

BTW, things like repeat rape offenses would still be properly punished in my system, because if someone was sentenced to 30 years for rape, he'd serve 30, not 15, then get out, and rape again.  That's why the '3 strikes' law was created in the first place, mainly rape, robbery, repeat offender people.  If they would get rid of the 50% off for good behaviour rule, people convicted wouldn't be on the streets to repeat the offense.  

To fund the prisons, they oughta make the inmates work, too, I think.  They could set up factories in the pen, and sell the things that are made.  Like why are we buying labor from japan and china, when we got 2-3 million people twiddling their thumbs in their prison cells 20 hours a day?  All the crap we import from other countries could be made right here, it would fund the prisons, and ease the tax burden on the citizens.

yah i feel everything u sayin. Theres gotta be more to prison tho. I mean, prison has become JUST a punishment. It does NOTHING to keep people frum committing crimes once they leave. Also, alot of people committ crimes (robbery, theft...or other similar crimes) who are IN a desperate situation. Whether its poverty, or whateva tha case is. Once youre out of jail...youre in an even MORE desperate situation. I dunno, tha "justice system" (tha quotes are there for a reason lol) and tha prison system need heavy revision, cus they obviously dont work.

[Cliftone_Santiago_909]

I dont really agree with it. The reason I disagree is cuz I think you should judge every case indivisually, I mean.. people doing life for stealing Pizza.. that's fuckin stupid... It's just not right. And I heard one of the that guy's other strikes was for posession of Marijuna also. That's cold.. he was just a pot head with tha munchies.. doing 25 to Life with murderers and crazy ass foolz. Not everybody should get the same time for the same crime both crimes are under diffenerent circumstances.

I was talkin to this white boy from my job... he was tellin me that in California.. one of the states with the highest Crime in tha U.S. We got 3 kinda of colleges out here, Community Colleges, Cal State Universities, and we got the big Universities.. the UC's.. Ivey League schools. Well I think he was sayin in tha past 100 years.. we haven't had one, not one new UC school built.. but we've had dozens and dozens of State Prisons built. That's a trip huh.. like their gettin ready to send more kids off to Prison than to School. Prisons are packed out here.. my brother was in Juvi a while back and he was talking about how they had to sleep on tha floor in tha hallwayz sometimes cuz all tha cells were taken up.

It's just crazy though.. if you get into tha whole politics of it. I'm just stickin to tha basics and how things should be.They just need to start treating people fair. It's all about who gots money, if you got money you get a free ride.. not even just bail but you can get off tha hook for almost anything.

I dont agree with Truama 100%  though. To me, Prison should be about self improvement, I think if they show progress and sort of prove they're not a threat to society, they should be released.. but still judging by the crime they did to begin with.. there should be 3 types of prisoners.. Lifers, the people doing life for really harsh crimes or repeated felonies.. People sentenced to Death.. and then people just doing time, released whenever they show they're ready.

I dont think they should have it easy either though. They should be put to work.. make them work for tha U.S. make tha tax burden easier on tha tax payers. There would be a Minimum time served for most crimes.. like rapist, murders and other hardcore crimes would have to have one so they wouldn't be able to get off too easy.

[ToNe1904]

^^true true. The funny thing iz, maybe if more money was spent on schools...thered be LESS people going to prison. I mean...money IS everything.

[Hittman]

He Shouldnt Have Been Stealing Golf Clubs In The First Place. Serves Him Right  

[ToNe1904]

He Shouldnt Have Been Stealing Golf Clubs In The First Place. Serves Him Right  

Didnt know u were a golfer Logic. LOL. The point is...25 years in prison for stealing golf clubs? When murderes sumtimes are released after 10 yrs. When a person who maybe only committed a felony once...but embezzled a million dollars wouldnt spend 25 yrs in prison. The politicians try to mask tha law by saying "its to punish repeat offenders". Maybe they should tell the truth and say..."its to punish the poor", seein as how the poor are more likely to be REPEAT offenders. Stealing golf clubs wont make it to where u dont steal again. Being a wealthy "business man" and embezzle a million dollars from a corporation, ud prolly neva need to do it again. Obviously if sum1 commits a crime...they should be punished. But, it needs to be on the same level playing field ALWAYS. Which, in America...and very much in Kali...its not. This law basically jus caters to the rich. Its a way to show that the politicians are "cracking down on crime". I would say, if its a felony that is in tha category of theft, tha 3 strikes law is fuckin ridiculous. The person who steals 200 dollars from 3 different individuals, on 3 seperate occasions....is punished far more then the person who steals 1,000,000 dollars ONCE...but in the process could possibly be stealing from 100 people at tha same time.

[Hittman]

Didnt know u were a golfer Logic. LOL. The point is...25 years in prison for stealing golf clubs? When murderes sumtimes are released after 10 yrs. When a person who maybe only committed a felony once...but embezzled a million dollars wouldnt spend 25 yrs in prison. The politicians try to mask tha law by saying "its to punish repeat offenders". Maybe they should tell the truth and say..."its to punish the poor", seein as how the poor are more likely to be REPEAT offenders. Stealing golf clubs wont make it to where u dont steal again. Being a wealthy "business man" and embezzle a million dollars from a corporation, ud prolly neva need to do it again. Obviously if sum1 commits a crime...they should be punished. But, it needs to be on the same level playing field ALWAYS. Which, in America...and very much in Kali...its not. This law basically jus caters to the rich. Its a way to show that the politicians are "cracking down on crime". I would say, if its a felony that is in tha category of theft, tha 3 strikes law is fuckin ridiculous. The person who steals 200 dollars from 3 different individuals, on 3 seperate occasions....is punished far more then the person who steals 1,000,000 dollars ONCE...but in the process could possibly be stealing from 100 people at tha same time.

The Man Who Stole The Golf Clubs Should Have Known What Position He Was Putting Himself In. Anyway, On The Whole Law Subjects, The British Justice System Is Fucked Up. You Cant Be Tried For The Same Crime Twice, Which Is Bullshit. Really Everything Needs To Be Changed. People Getting Away With Murders Because Of Laws Made Hundreds Of Years Ago. I Doubt Anything Major Will Happen With Laws Because The Whole Goverment Is Fucked Up.

Did Anyone From The UK See That Program About That Man Who Had Gone To Court Twice For Alledgedly Killing Some Woman? Then More Evidence Came After The Second Time He'd Gone To Court But He Couldnt Been Tried Again Because Of Some Stupid Law. He Then Admitted Too Killing Her But He Couldnt Get Life, And Just Got A Bullshit Sentence Of 7 Years For Pergury Of Some Shit. The Man Also Has A Violent Background And Broke A Baseball Bat Beating A Man In The Face With It And Stabbed A Woman With A Fork That Was Carrying His Baby. Fucking Scum......

[ToNe1904]

The Man Who Stole The Golf Clubs Should Have Known What Position He Was Putting Himself In. Anyway, On The Whole Law Subjects, The British Justice System Is Fucked Up. You Cant Be Tried For The Same Crime Twice, Which Is Bullshit. Really Everything Needs To Be Changed. People Getting Away With Murders Because Of Laws Made Hundreds Of Years Ago. I Doubt Anything Major Will Happen With Laws Because The Whole Goverment Is Fucked Up.

Did Anyone From The UK See That Program About That Man Who Had Gone To Court Twice For Alledgedly Killing Some Woman? Then More Evidence Came After The Second Time He'd Gone To Court But He Couldnt Been Tried Again Because Of Some Stupid Law. He Then Admitted Too Killing Her But He Couldnt Get Life, And Just Got A Bullshit Sentence Of 7 Years For Pergury Of Some Shit. The Man Also Has A Violent Background And Broke A Baseball Bat Beating A Man In The Face With It And Stabbed A Woman With A Fork That Was Carrying His Baby. Fucking Scum......

i agree with not bein able to try a person twice for the same crime. the reason that law was established was to make sure prosecutors couldnt just keep trying a person over n over...until they eventially found the jury that find them guilty. No matter how innocent someone is...therelly be SOMEONE who will think theyre guilty. And u could just keep trying someone...and hope that u find tha right jury.

[Hittman]

i agree with not bein able to try a person twice for the same crime. the reason that law was established was to make sure prosecutors couldnt just keep trying a person over n over...until they eventially found the jury that find them guilty. No matter how innocent someone is...therelly be SOMEONE who will think theyre guilty. And u could just keep trying someone...and hope that u find tha right jury.

Thats Another Thing That Annoys Me....The Jurys. If You Get Some Dumb Fucks Then You Can Have People Getting Off For Crimes They Quite Obviously Commited.

[ToNe1904]

Thats Another Thing That Annoys Me....The Jurys. If You Get Some Dumb Fucks Then You Can Have People Getting Off For Crimes They Quite Obviously Commited.

and u can also have people go to prison who are innocent. Which there are ALOT of in America. Its far worse to send an innocent person to prison, then it is to let a guilty person go free. Tha whole "justice system" iz pretty fuked up, racist, and very influenced by money. No one expects it to be PERFECT, only fair. It iz better then what it USED to be, but...thas not sayin that much.

[Political Gangsta]

Darth's post was full of sound theories that brought new music to my ears previously unheard.  I enjoyed the song he was singing.  His idea's of prisoners as a proxy for immigrant labor would liberate America from the burden of more prison taxes.

In the same vien I flow with Tone and Criminal909 in that cases should be dealt with individually.  I think we are correct in wondering aloud if the 3 strikes law has racial overtones.  White criminals, such as inside traders receiving light sentences for nearly wrecking the economic system.  Examples being the B.C.C.I. and S&L, an ignored drug smuggling scandel, infact the S&Lers will never come to trial.  Those involved with the Enron scandel, will recieve lighter sentencing then that cat that stole golf clubs.  This is an obvious criminal injustice.  

Another example of racial disharmony in the criminal justice system is crack cocaine (sold predominately by blacks) recieving harsher penalties then the white counterpart party drug of powder cocaine.

The only advantage I see to the 3 strikes law is the movie produced by DJ Pooh that came out on video in early 2000.  A movie capable of penetrating so profoundly into ones own little world, that I had to buy it as soon as it was released on DVD.  This movie could not have been possible if it wasn't for the 3 strikes law.  Correspondly the "3 Strikes" soundtrack featured a Ras Kass joint that spoke knowledgably on the wonderfully ironic social symptons plaquing today's hip-hop generation.

[ToNe1904]

sorry

Darth's post was full of sound theories that brought new music to my ears previously unheard.  I enjoyed the song he was singing.  His idea's of prisoners as a proxy for immigrant labor would liberate America from the burden of more prison taxes.

In the same vien I flow with Tone and Criminal909 in that cases should be dealt with individually.  I think we are correct in wondering aloud if the 3 strikes law has racial overtones.  White criminals, such as inside traders receiving light sentences for nearly wrecking the economic system.  Examples being the B.C.C.I. and S&L, an ignored drug smuggling scandel, infact the S&Lers will never come to trial.  Those involved with the Enron scandel, will recieve lighter sentencing then that cat that stole golf clubs.  This is an obvious criminal injustice.  

Another example of racial disharmony in the criminal justice system is crack cocaine (sold predominately by blacks) recieving harsher penalties then the white counterpart party drug of powder cocaine.

The only advantage I see to the 3 strikes law is the movie produced by DJ Pooh that came out on video in early 2000.  A movie capable of penetrating so profoundly into ones own little world, that I had to buy it as soon as it was released on DVD.  This movie could not have been possible if it wasn't for the 3 strikes law.  Correspondly the "3 Strikes" soundtrack featured a Ras Kass joint that spoke knowledgably on the wonderfully ironic social symptons plaquing today's hip-hop generation.

Whether theres racial overtones or not, is hard to say. But theres DEFINETELY injustice in this law towards the poor. Which, unfortunately in this country...goes hand in hand with minorities. So u cant tell whether this law is aimed at minorities, or aimed at the poor. But either way, its wrong. Which is why its being appealed now, as cruel and unusual punishment. Is it a surprise that this law was developed in California? A state where the difference between rich and poor is probably one of...if not THE biggest in country. California (just like the rest of the country) isnt a stranger to racist laws n policies (Prop 187 possibly being one of the most racist policies in recent history). So if anyone wonders why these laws get questioned, blame the law makers.

[Political Gangsta]

sorry

Whether theres racial overtones or not, is hard to say. But theres DEFINETELY injustice in this law towards the poor. Which, unfortunately in this country...goes hand in hand with minorities. So u cant tell whether this law is aimed at minorities, or aimed at the poor. But either way, its wrong. Which is why its being appealed now, as cruel and unusual punishment. Is it a surprise that this law was developed in California? A state where the difference between rich and poor is probably one of...if not THE biggest in country. California (just like the rest of the country) isnt a stranger to racist laws n policies (Prop 187 possibly being one of the most racist policies in recent history). So if anyone wonders why these laws get questioned, blame the law makers.

Yes.  The globalization of the 80's and 90's combined with company mergers of the 90's have opened up a Nazi like whole, ditch, or rut, the size of a mack truck, dividing the omnipotent administrators, the ruling class from the supermasculine menials of the underclass.  I was wrong in describing it as a black-white issue when in truth it is a rich-poor phenomenon.