calif law repeal

[happythoughts 0]

clicky

Quote

LOS ANGELES, Oct 4 (Reuters) - Californians who a decade ago voted in a landslide for a "Three Strikes" measure imposing long prison terms on career criminals are being asked to scale back that law by those who say it has unjustly snared small-time offenders.

Quote

They say Proposition 66 would gut one of the most effective pieces of crime legislation ever passed in California and, because it would be retroactive, release as many as 26,000 violent felons.

Quote

California prosecutors credit Three Strikes with a 45 percent drop in violent crime since 1994.

That's got to be an easy sell to the voters.
"We've been solving the crime problem. Let's do something quick."

Quote

But instrumental in getting Proposition 66 on the ballot was Jerry Keenan, whose son Richard is serving eight years in prison after crashing his Lexus while intoxicated, killing two people and injuring a third.

Quote

"Jerry Keenan has spent a million and a half dollars to get this thing on the ballot," prosecutor Gurwitz said. "This is a case of a wealthy father who is trying to buy an early prison release for his son who killed two people."

Quote

Keenan says that while he and his wife Cynthia have contributed heavily to the campaign for the ballot proposal, he is not on a crusade to buy his son's freedom.

Sure. Let's see... rich guy makes a choice... let kid stay in prison for 8 years, or spend lots of money to free kid and let 26,000 career criminals out on Calif.

[PhillyKev 0]

Quote

Three Strikes was sold to voters as a means to lock away hard core criminals for life but that too often it was being used against petty thieves or drug abusers.

Quote

Under Proposition 66 only a serious or violent felony would count as a second or third strike against a defendant

Quote

"Ten years ago I voted for something that I thought would affect only people who committed violent crimes," Keenan, who owns an insurance brokerage, told Reuters in an interview. "Eight years ago I found out that's not quite true. No matter how any D.A. wants to spin it the reality is they can pick and choose who they throw strikes at."

I have no problem keeping violent criminals in jail. But Three Strikes laws are used against non-violent criminals and as a result, someone who commits a non-violent crime gets a mandatory sentence, while a violent criminal without as many strikes will get early parole due to overcrowding.

Three Strikes is another example of removing the duty and responsibility of sentencing from the judiciary, where it belongs, where they can make judgments based on the individuals and severity of their crime, and creates an arbitrary formula mandated by the legislature.

[Nightingale 0]

in some cases, three strike is overkill. in others, not so much. I'd like to see three strikes be an "option" rather than a mandatory sentence, kinda like the death penalty. Apply it under certain circumstances.

[happythoughts 0]

The problem that most people have is the definition of what should constitute a felony or what is a violent crime.

In Florida, they have a special law for crimes committed with guns. Billboards advertise it. It has had an effect.

[PhillyKev 0]

That, I have no problem with. It's specific. Nothing wrong with the legislature laying out specific penalties for a specific crime. The problem I have is laying out specific penalties for a specific number of crimes without regard to what those actual crimes were. For instance, in PA, preostitution counts as a strike. Three strikes and you get life with no parole. So you get some unfortunate prostitute, who's busted a couple times for that, ends up having to fight off some guy and stabs him. Assault with a deadly weapon conviction....bam, life in prison. No chance for the judge to consider the circumstances. No, people shouldn't be hooking, but they don't deserve life in prison for it, either.

[happythoughts 0]

Quote

No, people shouldn't be hooking, but they don't deserve life in prison for it, either.

Personally, I believe that laws have one of two purposes. They either protect you from yourself or protect you from other people. As it is legal in some places, I am unsure what prostitution laws protect us from.

When something causes major damage, then it is a felony.

The Enron CEO (and his crooked wife) should be in jail for life. They ruined the lives of countless thousands, stole from thousands, and caused damage to the whole telecom industry and the US.