Three strikes and you're out.

Discussion in 'Law and Justice System' started by manifold, Mar 5, 2008.

  1. manifold
    Offline

    manifold Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2008
    Messages:
    48,778
    Thanks Received:
    7,237
    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Location:
    your dreams
    Ratings:
    +20,920
    Is there anyone left that still thinks the three strike laws were a good idea?

    Is minimum mandatory sentencing of any kind really a good idea?

    Why bother having judges at all if we're not going to allow them to judge?

    Any thoughts?
     
  2. Diuretic
    Offline

    Diuretic Permanently confused

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2006
    Messages:
    12,653
    Thanks Received:
    1,397
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    South Australia est 1836
    Ratings:
    +1,397
    Bad, bad idea. Really stupid idea. Populist politics at its worst.

    It was tried in the Northern Territory jurisdiction in Australia, it failed miserably and produced spectacularly bad situations, so bad the even though a bunch of populist politicians had passed it thinking it would enhance their opportunities t getting back into government, public reaction was so negative that they lost the following election.
     
  3. manifold
    Offline

    manifold Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2008
    Messages:
    48,778
    Thanks Received:
    7,237
    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Location:
    your dreams
    Ratings:
    +20,920

    I agree. Terrible idea.

    We place our trust in a justice system to determine guilt and innocence. I don't know why then it's not sufficient to also trust judges to exercise sound judgement and hand out just sentences. To try to apply black and white rules to matters of such nuance and subjectivity is to try to dehumanize the process.
     
  4. Ravi
    Offline

    Ravi Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2008
    Messages:
    81,431
    Thanks Received:
    12,698
    Trophy Points:
    2,205
    Location:
    Hating Hatters
    Ratings:
    +29,879
    Excellent point.

    None of the emoticons were expressive enough to express my feelings on reading that sentence.
     
  5. William Joyce
    Offline

    William Joyce Chemotherapy for PC

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2004
    Messages:
    9,693
    Thanks Received:
    1,135
    Trophy Points:
    190
    Location:
    Caucasiastan
    Ratings:
    +1,349
    I'm not soft on crime, but it's a pretty dumb idea. Ditto for sex offender identification... it makes soccer moms feel good, but legislation-by-talk-radio ain't a great idea. Knock off the gimmicks.
     
  6. RetiredGySgt
    Offline

    RetiredGySgt Platinum Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    39,584
    Thanks Received:
    5,906
    Trophy Points:
    1,140
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Ratings:
    +9,010

    The current ignorant laws on sex offenders is in my opinion totally unconstitutional. It places a life long punishment on these people WITHOUT actually legally doing so. Our system is simple, you go to jail and serve your time, when your time is up you return to society ( parole is a little differnt, but it still has a time limit) These people never finish their time.

    They are prevented from even LIVING in society. No city and no State has the right to bar them from living and working where they want. It violates the 4th and 8th Amendments.

    IF these people are a threat to society pass a law to imprison them for an appropriate length of time, life without parole for example. Punishing them by denying them the right to live anywhere is unconstitutional. THAT is CRUEL and UNUSUAL punishment. Forcing them to be publically identified everywhere they go for the rest of their lives is also CRUEL and UNUSUAL. Further it punishes any family they have also, which is also against the Constitution. If they own land it prevents them from living on it if inside a city. A clear violation of the 4th Amendment.

    Once again if they are a danger pass a damn law to keep them in jail or a hospital.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  7. Gunny
    Offline

    Gunny Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2004
    Messages:
    44,689
    Thanks Received:
    6,753
    Trophy Points:
    198
    Location:
    The Republic of Texas
    Ratings:
    +6,770
    Of course there should be mandatory minimums. Judges need parameters too. There have been to many idiotic rulings where there are none to not have them.

    People should be held accountable for their crimes. IMO, the reason we have as much lawlessness as we do is because crime DOES pay.
     
  8. RetiredGySgt
    Offline

    RetiredGySgt Platinum Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    39,584
    Thanks Received:
    5,906
    Trophy Points:
    1,140
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Ratings:
    +9,010
    Three strikes and your out is NOT right. It lumps anything and everything into the pot. It ties judges hands and it ties juries hands as well. No problem with minimum required sentences when someone is convicted of a crime, I am opposed to saying " ohh he gets life cause he did something before" I am also opposed to no tolerance laws they are ignorant and only exist because people are to damn lazy.
     
  9. Gunny
    Offline

    Gunny Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2004
    Messages:
    44,689
    Thanks Received:
    6,753
    Trophy Points:
    198
    Location:
    The Republic of Texas
    Ratings:
    +6,770
    I didn't address the three strikes laws, only mandatory minimums.

    I would think three strikes for the same or similar crimes would be more than fair. How many chances should one get to prove they are untrainable?

    Not sure I feel the same about unrelated crimes though. That would be dependent on what those crimes were, IMO.

    If judges could be trusted to do what they are supposed to do, such laws wouldn't exist.
     
  10. Ravi
    Offline

    Ravi Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2008
    Messages:
    81,431
    Thanks Received:
    12,698
    Trophy Points:
    2,205
    Location:
    Hating Hatters
    Ratings:
    +29,879
    And there have been too many harsh sentences for first offenses that result in turning offenders into career criminals.
     

Share This Page