Do you feel it may go overboard in some instances?
2007-02-22 11:36:30 · 5 answers · asked by Blackbeauty 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
The 3-Strikes laws need to be repealed. There is no justifiable reason to imprison for life a mother who steals a loaf of bread for the 3rd time (w/o violence). Where is the logic in this? The 3-Strikes laws need to be repealed.
2015-01-23 10:17:47 · update #1
"Three strikes" rules were enacted by self-serving and fearmongering politicians seeking three terms in office. They all need three strikes upside the head with a piece of rebar.
A life sentence for a third possession of a minor drug while a rapist gets out in eight years makes no sense. Also don't not forget the horrendous cost of locking up certain criminals for 20 years or more, or that most of those who end up on "three strikes" are the ones that were easy for the pigs to catch, ie. drug users rather than dealers.
"Three strikes" is as obscene and biased as the "death penalty": it's a rule targeted at the poorest and least educated of all criminals, and often in the case of "three strikes", the least harmful.
.
2007-02-22 11:47:28 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
There are some laws that need to be repealed. The 3-Strikes sentencing law is one of them.
2015-01-23 10:20:00 · answer #2 · answered by Blackbeauty 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It may indeed go overboard. Suppose someone is arrested three times for smoking pot? Are they such a menace to society that they need to be put away for life?
Let the time fit the crime.
2007-02-22 11:48:16 · answer #3 · answered by kscottmccormick 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
The way you've asked the two separate questions makes giving an answer a bit convoluted.
No to the first question and yes to the second.
2007-02-22 11:44:42 · answer #4 · answered by keengrrl76 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No, I feel 1 strike in rape, murder, abortion, should be plenty.
2007-02-22 11:42:00 · answer #5 · answered by americanmalearlington 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋