Adjustments needed to 3 strikes law

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Neserk, May 31, 2004.

  1. Neserk macrumors 6502a

    Neserk

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2004
    #1
  2. LethalWolfe macrumors G3

    LethalWolfe

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2002
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    #2
    While, in general, I disagree w/manditory sentences I would want to know more about this innitiative before considering to back it. I'm already a little weary of it because of it's origins. The guy who started the initiative son is serving 8 years for driving recklessly along back roads, rolling the car, killing 2 of the passengers and severely injurying<sp?> a thrid. He, the driver/son, was drunk, stoned and had a suspended license. He should get out of jail early why?


    Lethal
     
  3. Neserk thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Neserk

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2004
    #3
    I don't think it is getting out early that is the problem. It is that he won't get out at all. Did I misunderstand the 3 strikes law? I do think it needs to be adjusted. Rapists, child molesters, etc should be stuck in jail forever, but as the article indicated, not all law breakers should fall under the 3 strikes.
     
  4. Desertrat macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2003
    Location:
    Terlingua, Texas
    #4
    LW, don't judge on one particular case. The problem is the lack of discretion for a judge.

    For example, in Texas, some poor two-time loser got caught stealing a rather paltry dollar amount of stuff. Sneak-thievery; no violence. Barely made the felony level. But, since he'd had two strikes, he went up for life without parole. The judge had no discretion to affect the sentence.

    Check into the federal "guidelines" if you really want to see "harsh".

    'Rat
     
  5. LethalWolfe macrumors G3

    LethalWolfe

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2002
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    #5
    Neserk, I too am a bit confused. From what I understand 3 strikes means 25-life. But the first paragraph of the news story says the son is serving 8 years at Folsom. Am I just misreading something?

    'Rat,
    I agree that judges should be allowed more discretion<sp?>, but, like I said, I'm not going to back a specific plan unless I know more about it than what that article has to offer. Especially considering the extremely personal motivations of the person proposing the initiative.


    Lethal
     
  6. Thanatoast macrumors 6502a

    Thanatoast

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2002
    Location:
    Denver
    #6
    what i got out of the article is that this initiative would require that the three "strikes" consist of violent "grievous bodily harm" felonies. violent crimes or injury by recklessness.

    one size fits all sentencing is stupid, as is taking away discretion from judges. these expensive, ineffective, some would say detrimental, ideas came about the last time we had conservatives in power. glad to see they've learned nothing over the last decade. :rolleyes:
     
  7. Neserk thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Neserk

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2004
    #7
    I read the same. Perhaps the writer left something out. Maybe he is going to go elsewhere after 8 years :confused: 8 years is not enough time for what he did, imo. He killed two people by his own reckless behavior (being intoxicated and driving). No one in my age group or younger has *any* excuse for drinking and driving. We all saw gruesome pics in drivers ed of what can happen. It has been drilled into our heads since we were 15!
     
  8. Stelliform macrumors 68000

    Stelliform

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    #8
    I agree there. I think the mandatory sentencing is the legislative branch of government imposing itself on the judical branch, as cases like Roe v. Wade are the judicial branch becoming to legislative. I wish there was a better system of checks and balances, or maybe just a system that would get used. :rolleyes:
     
  9. Neserk thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Neserk

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2004
    #9
    This is a really boring thread. No one is disagreeing.
     
  10. Stelliform macrumors 68000

    Stelliform

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    #10
    Uhh ok, how about, this mess is all Clinton's fault!. ;) Now we should see some action. :)
     
  11. Neserk thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Neserk

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2004
    #11
    *waits for the action*
     
  12. Stelliform macrumors 68000

    Stelliform

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    #12
    I guess no one is taking the bait... :) Oh well, it is my bedtime...
     

Share This Page