cannabisnews.com: Three-Strikes Law Is Missing the Mark! Three-Strikes Law Is Missing the Mark! Posted by FoM on August 25, 1999 at 08:43:09 PT By Joe Klaas Source: LA Times Six years ago, my granddaughter, Polly Klaas, was snatched from her bedroom and murdered by a man who should have been behind bars. In response, our family and Californians rose up and passed the "three strikes" law, a law designed to remove predators like her murderer, Richard Allen Davis, from our streets. Or so we thought. Five years later, the data suggest that most people locked up for second or third strikes are not like Polly's killer. Rather, the majority have been convicted of nonviolent crimes, like marijuana possession or petty theft. Added to the grief that Polly's death has caused, my family now regrets that the law passed in her name casts too wide a net, fails to target the hard-core offenders it set out to reach and has diverted critical funds from crime prevention and education. Now the California Legislature is considering a bill that could help put our minds at rest. Introduced by Sen. John Vasconcellos (D-Santa Clara), the bill would authorize the state legislative analyst to study the impact of the three-strikes law. By signing this bill, Gov. Gray Davis could set in motion a process that will help us separate facts from fiction. When they sought our votes, the sponsors of three-strikes promised the public that their bill would remove dangerous criminals from our streets. Today, only a fraction of those serving 25-to-life sentences fit that profile, while a staggering 78% of second-strikers and 50% of third strikers were convicted for nonviolent offenses. Crime has plummeted in the Golden State since 1994. But while three-strikes proponents have cited this as irrefutable proof that the law works, no evidence links the statute to this welcome decline. In fact, the drop in crime merely reflects a national trend that has seen crime fall at a quicker rate in non-three-strikes states like Michigan and Alabama than in California. Meanwhile, California's prisons are bursting at the seams. More than 160,000 inmates are jammed into prisons that were made to house 80,000, and almost one-third of those prisoners are serving second- or third-strike sentences. Three-strikes enforcement will tie up billions of taxpayers dollars for decades to come. Consider the following: * Each prisoner serving a 25-to-life sentence will cost the state about $500,000 over his or her lifetime. * The annual cost of housing 29,000 nonviolent second- or third-strikers is $632 million. * Los Angeles County, which prosecutes about 40% of three-strikes cases statewide, racked up $322 million in enforcement costs from 1994 through 1997. * San Francisco has not sought three-strikes convictions for nonviolent offenses, yet crime (both violent and nonviolent) has fallen faster there than in Los Angeles. The impact of three-strikes reverberates far beyond the prison walls. Defendants who fear adding strikes to their name are bringing the legal system to a virtual standstill as they reject plea bargains and opt for trial. And with second-and third-strikers flooding our prisons, other serious offenders are securing early release with alarming frequency. The time has come for Californians to pose a painful question: Does three-strikes offer enough benefits to justify its huge fiscal and societal impact? In a climate in which the words "soft on crime" sound the death knell for anyone who aspires to political office, few in power dare question the value of the three-strikes statute. How many more prisons must we build before our leaders realize that locking up more nonviolent offenders doesn't equal being tough on crime? My family and I understand more than most why we need strict laws that prevent monsters like Richard Allen Davis from hurting our kids, But we also owe it to ourselves to be smart about law enforcement. We must seek out the truth about three-strikes and inform the debate with solid facts and figures. It's too late to bring Polly back. But it's not too late for Gov. Davis and the Legislature to take this step toward making California a wiser, safer state. Joe Klaas Lives in Pebble BeachWednesday, August 25, 1999 Copyright 1999 Los Angeles Times Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help Comment #6 posted by PAMELA WHITE on August 02, 2001 at 09:13:29 PT: PAUL S DAVISON (E-73965) MY FIANCE IS NOW SERVING A LIFE SENTANCE AT CENTINELA STATE PRISON IN IMPERIAL CALIFORNIA FOR A NON-VIOLENT CRIME...RECIEVING STOLEN PROPERTY (ATTEMPTING TO PURCHASE A VCR ON THE STREET) HE HAS 4 CHILDREN. I WOULD LIKE ANY NEW INFORMATION THAT I COULD SEND HIM ON THIS UNFAIR LAW. [ Post Comment ] Comment #5 posted by Bill K. on May 21, 2001 at 08:49:54 PT: The Wrong Three Strikes I began working for the California Department of Corrections as a Social Worker only one year ago. In this short span of time, I have come to realize how wrong the Three Strikes sentencing law really is. My clerk, who will never leave prison, is only one example of the hundreds of cases where the Three Strikes law has missed its mark. He is being warehoused to the tune of $26,000 a year for possession of .001 gram of heroin; he is a life-long drug addict. Some would say that he has earned his sentence for possession of the narcotic and the two prior burglary cases. In fact, I believe that is the consensus of most of the population of Californian's who believe that locking up career criminals such as my clerk is ridding society of dangerous repeat thugs. To some degree, I believe they are right. Violent repeat criminals such as Richard Allen Davis ought to be locked up for life (and in his case, the death sentence he so deserves), but where is the justice in the case of my clerk? His two prior offenses were burglary cases related to his addiction for which he has already served more than ten years in prison. Yes, I do agree that he has caused some harm to society by entering the homes of others and stealing their property to buy drugs, but 25-Life for possession dope? I am not a bleeding heart liberal, in fact, I would consider myself mostly conservative, but after examining many cases such as the one mentioned above, I have come to the conclusion that the Three Strikes Law is a total failure when we decide to strike-out non-violent offenders. It does manage to snare some violent repeat offenders who would otherwise continue their life-long crime spree with careless disregard for the rights of others and in that way the law does work. But the more than sixty cases that I have become aware of in the short time I have been working for CDC leads me to believe that a great injustice is taking place that is indicative of the state of the human condition. Apathy and ignorance have taken a hold of our better judgment. Is this really the right Three Strikes or have we made an egregious error? [ Post Comment ] Comment #4 posted by RON on May 11, 2001 at 15:57:29 PT three strikes question HI, MY NAME IS RON AND I AM A TWO STRIKER. I HAVE TWO STRIKES FOR FIRST DAGREE BURGLARY, PC459. THEY CONSIDER THIS CRIME TO BE VIOLENT BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT THERE IS A POTENTIAL FOR VIOLENCE. THAT IS NOT THE REASON I AM WRITING THIS. THE REASON I'M WRITING TO YOU IS THAT MY BROTHER WAS FOUND GUILTY FOR POSSESSING A CONTROL SUBSTANCE, TO WIT HAROIN. HIS PRIOR OFFENCES ARE, FIRST DEGREE BURGLARY, ASULT WITH A FIRE ARM, AND THE POSSESSION. THOSE ARE THE STRIKES THEY ARE USING TO GIVE HIM 25-LIFE. IS THERE ANY CASE LAW OR FACTS THAT I CAN OBTAIN THAT CO-INSIDES WITH THE NEW PROP. 36 LAW. OR CAN YOU INFORM ME WEATHER OR NOT HE FITS THE PROFILE FOR THE PROP.36 ACT. THANK YOU."RON" [ Post Comment ] Comment #3 posted by Chris Barsness on May 06, 2000 at 17:38:03 PT: three-strikes law I am currently about to graduate from law school and I have done research on the three strikes law. The idea of getting career criminals locked up is a good one, but the three strikes law is not the right way to do it. The law does not put away career violent criminals, it puts away people who may have done non-violent crimes. California should wake up and realize that we are almost the only state that enforces the three strikes law against non-violent offenders, such as petty theifs. The politicians won't talk about it because they are afraid to appear soft on crime, but somebody has to. Wake up America and California! [ Post Comment ] Comment #2 posted by FoM on August 26, 1999 at 07:51:49 PT Laws Made In A Hysterical State Are Wrong. Thanks Tom for your input! I sure appreciate it. Polly Klass's Grandfather sees the need to change these laws. We make laws on hysteria and then on down the road we see the horrible results. I think the murderer of Polly Klass should never see the light of day but with the system as it is some murderer wil be left out early to make room for marijuana and other drug offenders. Then there are those who want more prisons because they have money to make from it. Or drug testing investments too! [ Post Comment ] Comment #1 posted by Tom Paine on August 26, 1999 at 05:38:33 PT Republicans and NRA paid for lobbying these laws! http://www.prop1.org/legal/prisons/970317itt.htm*3-97. "the NRA formed CrimeStrike in 1991 ... November 1993 whenit backed Washington state's 'Three Strikes..." initiative, thenation's first. ... rapidly followed by similar victories inCalifornia [where nonviolent minor felonies such as sharingmarijuana are strikes]. ... In Virginia and Mississippi, ... theNRA was 'instrumental' in passing truth-in-sentencing [mandatoryminimums] measures which lengthened average prison sentences."http://homepages.go.com/~marthag1/AlabamaLive.htm [ Post Comment ] Post Comment Name: Optional Password: E-Mail: Subject: Comment: [Please refrain from using profanity in your message] Link URL: Link Title: