Three Strike Law: The Three Strikes Laws

¶ … Three Strike Law: The Three Strikes Laws are policies in the criminal justice system that target repeat criminals and are enacted by many states. Following three distinct offense convictions or strikes, offenders are locked out of society by being sentenced to life imprisonment. The reason behind the Three Strike Law is that offenders who commit crimes repeatedly are likely to pose a serious threat to the society and should be jailed in order to protect the society ("Understanding Three Strikes," n.d.).

In many states, Three Strike laws only consider serious or violent crimes as the first two strikes with a considerably lower threshold for the third strike. This lower threshold for the third strike includes crimes like forgery and shoplifting, which may result in a sentence of between 25 years to life imprisonment. The Three Strike Law was first incorporated in the criminal justice system in early 1990s when California adopted such policies as a reaction to a killing committed by a twice-convicted criminal.

Since then, many states have adopted and amended the legislations of their three strikes laws because of the findings of some studies regarding the ineffectiveness of these policies to lessen the overall crime rates. Some of these studies have also discovered that the provisions of the three strikes laws are responsible for crowding prisons in many states. The Three Strikes Laws were basically designed for the purpose of reducing crime rates in two major ways.

This includes lessening crime by weakening repeat criminals for lengthy periods and preventing potential criminals with previous records from re-offending. Potential Effectiveness of the Three Strike Law: Since the implementation of the Three Strikes Laws, the legislations have had a significant impact on the criminal justice system. Additionally, these policies have generated controversies and criticisms regarding their effectiveness in achieving the desired goals. Many opponents of the laws have criticized them for oversimplifying the criminal justice system.

These opponents consider the three strikes laws as factors that have contributed to prison crowding with less impact on the actual crime rates. Furthermore, they believe that the automatic sentences forces judges to view offenses black and white even when it involves gray area. These laws have mainly contributed to prison crowding because they increase the length of sentences and the average length of prison stay.

The increased length of prison stay is partly because of second strikers or offenders are subjected to longer sentences than the average sentences for inmates. However, there are several factors that lead to the potential effectiveness of the three strikes laws in the criminal justice system. This includes their ability to offer a solution for a flawed criminal justice system in order for repeat offenders to stay in prison and provision of an efficient deterrent after the second conviction (Messerli, 2006).

The potential effectiveness of these policies also emanate from its application to three convictions rather than three crimes. Generally, the three strikes law is a means of ensuring that justice is done since many crimes are usually committed by repeat offenders. Limitations of the Three Strikes Laws: Some of the limitations of the three strikes law emanates.