With thousands of cases, you're always bound to find exceptions like these.
However, the law punishes rapists, armed robbers, extortionists, organized.
criminals, and more. An objective media portrayal would show the 3 victims of the.
three-strike criminal and the impact on them.
The law applies to 3 convictions, not 3 crimes (i.e. criminals may get away.
with several incidents). We all know that in the real world criminals get away with.
many crimes. The police may not have any clue who committed the crime, the.
police may not have near enough evidence to prosecute, and the criminal may.
simply slip through the system with the aid of a slick lawyer. It's a major judicial.
accomplishment to get one conviction. Thus, when the three-strikes law is applied, it.
is often applied to a criminal who has committed far more than 3 crimes.
The law destroys the flexibility of the courts and the judge. Each criminal offender.
is different. Each set of crimes is different. The specific reason we have judges,.
juries, and lawyers is that each situation deserves a fair analysis and punishment. A.
one-size-fits-all system of judgment destroys the flexibility.
It is unjust in certain conditions (victimless crimes, young criminals, etc.). There are.
always going to be cases like the stealing videos or pizza that are unjustly subjected.
to the three-strikes law. You may have an 18-year old who commits three crimes.
before he's mature enough to make quality decisions. You have 2-time convicted.
felons who may have been leading decent, upstanding lives being at the wrong place.
at the wrong time. You may have a sequence of lighter crimes such as burglary,.
breaking & entering, or stealing a car. Certainly committing these crimes are wrong.
and deserve punishment; however, is 25 years to life a reasonable punishment (in.
addition to whatever they were sentenced for the first 2 crimes)?.
Criminals often plea bargain their first two convictions. Plea bargains have become.
