Skip to comments.
Supreme Court Upholds 'Three-Strikes' Sentence
Reuters ^
| 3/5/03
Posted on 03/05/2003 8:12:20 AM PST by B-bone
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-92 next last
To: 11th Earl of Mar
FELONIES. That clinches it for me.
41
posted on
03/05/2003 9:18:19 AM PST
by
PISANO
To: sinkspur
Three misdemeanor drug possession charges dont make you a "felon" or a violent criminal. Sorry, try again.
I never understand these crazy ideas of using some techicality to put someone away instead of putting them in jail for actual, violent crimes if they committed them.
Comment #43 Removed by Moderator
Comment #44 Removed by Moderator
To: FreeTally
I never understand these crazy ideas of using some techicality to put someone away instead of putting them in jail for actual, violent crimes if they committed them. These are habitual criminals. As someone else said, I'd be in favor of putting them away for spitting on the sidewalk.
Did you read this Ewing guy's rap sheet?
"Three-strikes-and-you're-out" is not going to snare some little old lady swiping a Walnetto.
45
posted on
03/05/2003 9:35:18 AM PST
by
sinkspur
To: sinkspur
Did you read this Ewing guy's rap sheet? Yes, and I asked why he wasnt in jail for the actual crimes he committed, instead of being put away for a long time for stealing golf clubs.
I am a tough on real crime type of person. You rob, you rape, you kill, you have no business among civilized people. Dont let people get away with those crimes and then make up some crazy technicality type law that makes a small charge the one that puts them away.
To: FreeTally
That's what I don't like about the three strikes laws. Rather than directly solve the problem and fix an obviously broken system, a one-size-fits-all gimmick is enacted. It's easy, quick, popular, catchy, and avoids all of the hard work of enacting specific statutes, bringing the judiciary under some rule of law, and actually making decisions about what crimes deserve what punishment.
25 years for stealing golf clubs is asinine, grossly disproportionate, and violates the clear spirit of the eighth amendment. It's rare that I side with the Left Wing of SCOTUS, but these laws are unworthy of a serious justice system.
To: mvpel
Under California law, prior convictions can transform even minor misdemeanors, such as shoplifting two video tapes or a golf club, into a felony, and the "three strikes" law doesn't distinguish between violent and non-violent felonies. Yes, that's exactly what happened to the guy that started this whole appeal. He had 2 fellony arrests and third strike was a mere misdemeanor but it got bumped. I don't like this part of the rule. You can spit on the ground and wind up in jail for life.
Another problem is sentencing tax payers to 40,000 a year for 25 years in taxes to keep someone in jail who has just spit on the ground.
To: You Dirty Rats
but these laws are unworthy of a serious justice system. There was a study done that shows 8% of society commit the majority of the crimes. Oddly, this behavior can be observed in elementary school. But go figure why the Education system doesn't take care of it? They have a hard enough time teaching.
Again, you have to remember, for a "repeat offender", more likely than not this guy has done a whole bunch of crimes. It's just not 100% that he has. However, 3 strikes brings a bit of order to the mess. The citizens are the ones who wanted the third to be ANY Felony, not necessarily a violent one. Which includes going after the thug that took pizza from two boys.
Bottom line, it takes the people who are committing crimes off the streets. The amount of property and lives that remain unmolested because of this is beyond whatever price tag it costs to incarcirate them.
To: B-bone
I guess he was hoping that the Supreme Court would give him a Mulligan.
50
posted on
03/05/2003 10:04:42 AM PST
by
pghkevin
(Have you hugged your kids today? Have you thanked someone in the Military today?)
To: You Dirty Rats
Rather than directly solve the problem and fix an obviously broken system, a one-size-fits-all gimmick is enacted. Exactly. I totally agree.
To: FreeTally
The mandatory sentence of a three strike law is meant as an end around play against liberal judicial activists who think that crime as well as morality is all relevant and that habitual criminals can be rehabilitated.
52
posted on
03/05/2003 10:12:41 AM PST
by
Eva
To: Eva
I understand that, but #47 spelled out the problems with that very well.
To: FreeTally
No, the argument in #47 is wrong. The punishment is not for stealing the golf clubs, the severe punishment is for the series of crimes that led to the final court appearance. It is the accumulative debt that the perpetrator owes to society. It is like a debtor who is given grace on his mortgage payment time and time again. Finally he misses a payment without asking for grace and the bank hits him with a repo notice.
54
posted on
03/05/2003 10:21:23 AM PST
by
Eva
To: B-bone
although I like the general concept of 3 strikes, I think the ability to treat misdemeanors as felonies ex-post facto seems insane to me.
It is one thing to lock away some gang banger or con-artist, but taking otherwise minor offences such as Marijuana Possession or vandalism and elevating those to felonies so they can get three strikes just seems stupid.
It's not worth $80,000 a year to lock up some pothead or homeless bum who stole a slice of pizza
To: Eva
Between 1984 and 1993, he was found guilty of four thefts and a battery. He should have been in jail for such crimes if he was such a threat to the community.
Put people in jail for violent crimes. Do not let them roam free, then make some crazy law that makes a non-violent offense the one that puts them away. Its stupid and shows no responsibility for the protection of the rights and lives of citizens. Three Strikes are two too many.
To: FreeTally
If drug addicts are not legitimate targets of "3-strikes and it's over" laws, nobody is a legitimate target. Kudos to FL.
57
posted on
03/05/2003 10:35:07 AM PST
by
AFPhys
To: ContentiousObjector
It is one thing to lock away some gang banger or con-artist, but taking otherwise minor offences such as Marijuana Possession or vandalism and elevating those to felonies so they can get three strikes just seems stupid. It's not worth $80,000 a year to lock up some pothead or homeless bum who stole a slice of pizza.
Exactly. Some people just dont get this.
Many people imprisoned under three strikes laws had two felonies 10, maybe 20 years ago, but have had a clean record since. Then, something like petty theft or drug possession is added as a "three strike" offense and the person goes to prison for 25+ years. Total insanity.
To: AFPhys
If drug addicts are not legitimate targets of "3-strikes and it's over" laws, nobody is a legitimate target. Kudos to FL. This doesn't even make sense. Drug possession is more of a problem than say, rape? Arson? Theft? Murder?
People should be put in jail for violating the rights of others. Nothing more, nothing less.
To: FreeTally
Why not put a person in jail for the actual violent crimes he committed instead of inventing some "three strikes law" ...... For that matter, why not have followed that philosophy with Al Capone and wait until he committed yet another murder he could be convicted of instead of nailing him on a penny-ante thing like tax fraud?
60
posted on
03/05/2003 10:41:03 AM PST
by
AFPhys
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-92 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson