When it comes to drug possession charges that are felonies, those offenses should generally never have any consideration for “three strikes”. Even if there are related and ancillary crimes (e.g. theft), a life sentence for drug possession is not something that can be justified. The one caveat to that statement would be people that are dealing or trafficking. It is usually not hard to tell the difference. If someone has a large quantity of drugs and/or the drugs are individually packaged for sales, that is a telltale sign that they are selling it. Absent that sort of thing, rehabilitation should be one of the first things offered. If the person committed property or other non-violent crimes during their drug use, jail might be warranted. However, the user can get treatment while they are in prison. If they refuse to get treatment, they will still serve their sentence. However, that sentence should not be excessive. Further, the punishment should focus on the non-drug crimes that were committed (Mills & Romano, 2013).
Something related to drug offenses that deserves its own mention is that there are many instances where simple drug possession is an offender’s third strike. Indeed, it is commonly a felony to possess a number of street drugs. Marijuana is often treated as a misdemeanor unless the amount is beyond a certain weight. However, possessing any amount of cocaine, ecstasy, methamphetamine or crack is often a felony. Beyond that, possessing pills without a prescription is often commonly a felony. Given that there are several classes of prescription drugs that are commonly abused, trafficked and exchanged, this is no small thing. A few examples of such pills would be opiate pills (e.g. Vicodin, OxyContin, etc.), benzodiazepines (e.g. Xanax, Klonopin, etc.) and ADHD drugs (e.g. Ritalin, Concerta, Adderall). There is little doubt that people of all races and background are guilty of using or abusing illicit street drugs, prescription drugs or both. However, the people that are commonly ensnared when it comes to criminal offenses relating to this drug are commonly African-Americans and Hispanics (Sutton, 2013). The same human and public budgetary costs that are present with other deficiencies in the law are present in this situation. Beyond that, there is a clear disparity in who is caught up in a life sentence due to the problems with the three strikes law (Donald, 2013). Beyond the above, the means that are used to capture and prosecute people for drug use are sometimes over the top and excessive. It is to the point that many convictions have been nullified on constitutional and other grounds (“Rochin v. California”, 2017).
As noted earlier in this report, public safety should be a factor. Many to most non-violent crimes are more of a nuisance than an issue of safety. However, there are some non-violent offenses where public safety is a real issue. For example, people that are alcohol-addicted (or at least reckless) and that continue to drive drunk despite multiple offenses are a good example. People that break into inhabited houses (knowingly or not) are another good example. If these people refuse to stop committing such crimes and endangering the public, perhaps jail is where they belong. However, the three strikes law is too imprecise. An escalating ladder of sentencing is probably warranted but there should be some customizability and discretion involved. It is important to discuss things like this when it comes to DUI since, for example, a third DUI is itself a felony in a lot of states. Even so, there is a way to regulate these DUI offenders without throwing them in jail for life. For any offender that is willing to wear an alcohol-monitoring bracelet (e.g. SCRAM) and/or is willing to have an interlock device on their car, that person can and should remain free. They should also get access to Alcoholics Anonymous and/or other rehabilitation services as is needed to gain and keep their sobriety. However, if they do not abide by the terms of their freedom, they should go to jail. If a person remains clean for three years, they can be removed from all restrictions. This would seem to be a good balance between not spending too much in public funds and keeping the…
Three Strikes Law There are numerous problems associated with the prison system in the state of California. More than a few of these problems are directly caused by the state's infamous Three Strikes legislation -- in which individuals who receive three felonies are sentenced to 25 years to a life term in prison. In codifying the problems related to the state's prison system as identified by the essay written by the
Therefore, by increasing the costs of imprisonment by the three strikes law, it is intended that there will be less crime. Marwell and Moody express several difficulties with the laws in the 24 states: Criminals are not always aware of the laws, at least not initially; repeat criminals can be expected to serve substantial prison terms even in the absence of the laws; almost all of the states already
Locking up petty thieves and drug users (the overwhelming majority of them black and Latino males) for 25 years to life without the possibility of parole is a blatant violation of the Eighth Amendment prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment." Summary and Conclusion Changes are needed in order to address the critical problem of overcrowding in U.S. Prisons and as well the fact that there are so many non-violent offenders housed
Criminal Justice -- Three Strikes Law Decades ago, America got tough on crime, especially when it involved habitual offenders. In order to reduce crime, at least 26 states passed Three Strikes Law giving especially long sentences to those offenders. The original Three Strikes Law had consequences that outweighed the benefits, so many states have amended or otherwise revised Three Strikes, usually reducing or eliminating mandatory maximum sentences and giving judges more
Written into the legal changes would be protocols for review of cases to re-determine parole eligibility in certain cases but especially those where the latter crimes were non-violent and relatively minor offences. Because of this review aspect the legal and physical changes of this alternative is the most effective in both the short-term and long-term, of dealing with prison overcrowding. This alternative was chosen, not because it is the
Many times, police officers are attacked or the prisoners themselves are injured during this booking process. The deaths and injuries, specifically of prisoners belonging to ethnic minorities, have triggered conflicts between the police and the community in recent years. Studies showed that the separation of the arresting officer and the suspect appeared to lessen the rate of reoccurrence. The studies recommended an evaluation of procedures and reinforcement (Community Relations