[Kevin Curry]

. . . especially knowing that most offenders "grow out" of a life of crime.

And just where does this "truth" come from?

[CFC__VRWC]

I'll bet this paper's editorial board is 100-percent behind the Democratic filibuster of Miguel Estrada, and would eagerly embrace a scorched-earth left-wing campaign to keep any judge who is remotely conservative from getting anywhere near any bench in any local, state or federal court. These pea-brained editors probably look at the 9th Circus Court of Appeals as a model, middle-of-the-road judiciary, and wistfully pine for the day when every court in the land is at least as far to the Left as the 9th.

With that in mind, it's too bad that these editors will NEVER understand why state legislatures all over America have passed "three strikes" laws, and why these laws typically enjoy 75% to 80% approval among the voters. And that's simply because their "model" judges, if left to their devices, absolutely refuse to punish the criminals that appear before them, typically sentencing them to months in prison (or to probation), even when they commit absolutely hideous, heinous crimes.

The law-abiding public is sick and tired of living in fear of these predators, who are allowed to roam freely in the streets because some bleeding-heart in a black robe thinks slapping murderers and rapists on the wrist is a fine way to demonstrate his "compassion for the downtrodden." So while three-strikes laws may sometimes be clumsy tools for administering justice, they are one of the few ways we have as a society to protect ourselves from violent criminals, as lons as the courts in this country are stacked with the kind of judges of which these editors approve.

[TheMole]

The Washington state three strikes law, passed by popular initiative, gives an additional 10-year no-parole sentence for a third felony. It's probably the best of these efforts.

BTW, Breyer really showed himself to ba a complete horse's ass on this one. If you extend his logic, no state could ever do anything differently from what most of the other states are doing.

[Porterville]

I don't like this law. One reason is dudes who come out of prison after serving ten years often have nowhere to go but back to their old neighborhoods. Punks will mad dog these ex-cons who are afraid, who have been locked up and psychologically not all there. They may get in a fight and go to jail for the rest of their life for assault and battery. Fighting and defending yourself from street punks, no matter who you are, should not send you back to jail by default. There are a million other examples. This is a bad law.

[Age of Reason]

They're tremendously expensive, for instance, especially knowing that most offenders "grow out" of a life of crime. Under these laws, some very old men are will be living in prison long after they couldn't hurt anybody if they wanted to.

If they were executed we wouldn't have to waste money guarding, housing and feeding them for decades.

[jwalsh07]

They're tremendously expensive, for instance, especially knowing that most offenders "grow out" of a life of crime.

LOL.

[BamaGirl]

Hi HW,

Have you found out any information about the two previous crimes committed by Ewing? I also looked for information about Leandro Andrade but couldn't find anything except something about armed robbery and burglary.

I am guessing that the reason why the sentences were so harsh is that the previous two crimes, in both cases, were pretty hideous. Perhaps we are also not getting the full story on the third crimes.

[lewislynn]

. (If the thousands it will cost to keep that offender in prison were spent on his addiction, you have to wonder if he wouldn't be able to kick his habit.)

Let him kick his habit in prison where he belongs.

Criminals need to be educated. They need to learn that "three srikes, you're out"... When they've learned that they'll be on thier way to recovery.

[lewislynn]

'3-strikes' Laws Not Justice at its Best

Oh well, nothin's perfect.

[Unknowing]

I'm afraid this is what Constitutional scholars might call "comity at its best."

[dirtboy]

I don't think the application of the three-strikes law here is unconstitutional, just stupid. I can see why legislatures want to pass them - to keep nitwit liberal judges from giving serious repeat perps a slap on the wrist. But putting this guy and others like him in jail for that length of time will probably allow some really bad guy to walk in the future because of overcrowding, resulting in the exact situation the legislators were trying to prevent in the first place, just at a different point.

[RJL]

But the best case against "three-strike" sentences is that justice ought to be individually tailored. Society should want judges to be judges--taking one case at a time and having to account for their decisions.

This is the rub isn't it? The judges were not acting responsibly.
Judges continually released repeat offenders into society and the criminals continued their criminal acts, so society changed the laws so judges had no choice.

The judges, by their actions, created the three strikes laws.

[Ben Bolt]

5-4 .. That was close .

[LibKill]

Typical liberal rubbish.

For some crimes (real serious stuff, like armed robbery and up to and including rape/murder) I'm in favor of 'One strike and we execute you'.

[PISANO]

Seems to me that the 10th Amendment rules here. The punishment meted out by states as long as NOT CRUEL AND UNUSUAL is up to them. 25 years for a third felony where there was a history of violence seems justified.