2A

Do you think the three strikes law is a good policy, or do you think it can be dangerous in itself?

From the spin that Winston put on it, it seems to have been counterproductive as a deterrent.

Purely in economic terms, this seems to be a very expensive way to manage the penal system. The prisons would soon be filled beyond capacity, requiring more to be built. Add in the everyday costs of feeding the inmates and paying for extra manpower, not to mention the electricity bill (!)…

The book was written in 1998: is ‘three strikes’ still a thing?

Mr. Google was helpful...as always.

"The Three Strikes policy was not in effect in 1998. It was enacted in 1994 in California, and since then, it has undergone significant modifications, including the passage of Proposition 36 in 2012, which changed the law's application. Therefore, the policy was not in place during the year 1998."

>3 Carol420: Thanks, Carol, 🙂.

I tink it can be both. My memory isn’t great, but when first enacted it seemed like a good idea. However, as Sergei mentions, it ended up putting more people in prison for longer times - and unfairly as there wasn’t a distinction as to type. So it did create more costs. The law changed to be for violent felonies only (in 2012 per mr google), which helped a lot. But i don’t know if it had/has created more problems and more daring criminals for someone that already had 2 strikes. All this is just my viewpoint based on what I can recall. I’ve been a Ca resident since before the law was enacted.

I think it’s dangerous and causes more deaths as they kill off the witness of crimes.

>6 EadieB: Totally with you Eadie, very dangerous and put other people - victims and witnesses more at risk. What did they have to lose on this third occasion.