Crime Do you support bringing back the "3 strikes" rule?

[welcometohavoc]

I think they began being lax about this in the last 25 years or so

I remember in the 90s people were scared about this

but now not so much

There's so many repeat offenders here. They do shit every day. Most of the shit they do are not even on record because they dont get caught on most of the illegal shit they do.

For example, burglary. If someone gets caught burgalizing a place of business or a residential home, after doing it 3 times.

Another issue is that the law is very, VERY lenient on juveniles, which do a LOT of the crime here in California, probably the entire country.

For example, the "hitters" in gang shootings are often the young because the punishment is basically nothing compared to what it would be if they were adults. In Mexican and black gangs here in LA.

For violent offenses, absolutely.

A three-strikes law for violent crimes, including some simple assaults, would enforce tougher penalties for repeat offenders while allowing flexibility to ensure fairness. Simple assault-threats or minor physical contact without serious harm-could count as a strike if it shows a pattern of violence, targets vulnerable individuals, or involves aggravating factors, as decided by a judge. The first strike involves standard penalties and rehabilitation, the second increases sentencing and parole conditions, and the third results in significant prison time (e.g., 7-15 years or life with parole eligibility). Judicial discretion, mandatory hearings, and appellate reviews help avoid misuse, ensuring only serious or habitual cases of simple assault are included, balancing public safety with fairness.

 

[MMAisGod]

100%. I'd even support 3 strikes and the death penalty

I bet you do Chris Benoit, I bet you do.

 

[ermac88]

My concern with this, we're seeing a growing wealth disparity and people are having a difficult time buying homes or even affording basic groceries.

I read gen Z males are struggling to get jobs, college grads have the same unemployment as HS drop outs.

With Ai taking jobs, rising unemployment and the elites getting wealthier, crime is going to increase.

We already have the largest incarceration on the planet.

Are we just going to lock up society instead of try to fix it?

 

[chrisdiaz]

Of course. If your stupid enough to get 3 felonies your stupid enough to get 4. The 3 strikes law was the only deterrent certain members of our society understood.

Idiots in here will try to justify not having it until they are victims of a crime and go running to the cops asking why they didnt do anything. Or even worse, justify the crime because of someone elses despair.

 

[wolffanghameha]

Theft and burglary are different but in my world yes! Adults wilfully stealing others property give up their right to exist in my civil society! The leniency would be, did you forget the candy bar at the bottom of the reusable bag used to gather groceries instead of a cart before paying and walked out without scanning it? You stole it but that shouldn't be the end of your life in my society.

The problem with stealing is it harms the thief most and that's never mentioned. The real harm isn't the loss of the material possession, or possibly even the violation of victims privacy but it's the sacrifice of ones integrity who's willing to sell themselves so short by taking from others. We have to demand people respect themselves so much, they'd never think taking someone else's things is an option... of course this is fantastical unrealistic idealism but the principle remains...

Getting people to change their moral position doesn't happen by coercing them with fear of reprisal. Then they're more focused on the fear than on forming their their own thoughts about the issue, which robs their chance to have the change come from within (encouraged from outside). Fear works fine for results sometimes, but it says nothing about the moral integrity of the person if they're acting only in fear of prison.

A separate issue is society is not meritocratic. Eg you can find lots of people in jobs doing a half-assed job, despite being intellectually capable of doing better in their role. They're stealing part of their living. However people's worth in society is judged as if society was meritocratic. Society rewards dishonest people plenty. So some people try to make up the gap by stealing.

Some behaviours aren't even illegal, or barely are, and are much worse than stealing $10. So if stealing $10 should be life, so should many other things. A public sector worker can half ass their job, costing the state more that could have been spent on delivering more or better services. A teacher or school admin can willfully overlook bullying, causing psychological harm to children that has a negative economic consequence to the country. A landlord can postpone repairs just because they don't gaf, being in breach of their contract or just morally being in the wrong, incurring extra financial costs to tenants or a reduction in normal property enjoyment.

 

[badascan]

Getting people to change their moral position doesn't happen by coercing them with fear of reprisal. Then they're more focused on the fear than on forming their their own thoughts about the issue, which robs their chance to have the change come from within (encouraged from outside). Fear works fine for results sometimes, but it says nothing about the moral integrity of the person if they're acting only in fear of prison.

A separate issue is society is not meritocratic. Eg you can find lots of people in jobs doing a half-assed job, despite being intellectually capable of doing better in their role. They're stealing part of their living. However people's worth in society is judged as if society was meritocratic. Society rewards dishonest people plenty. So some people try to make up the gap by stealing.

Some behaviours aren't even illegal, or barely are, and are much worse than stealing $10. So if stealing $10 should be life, so should many other things. A public sector worker can half ass their job, costing the state more that could have been spent on delivering more or better services. A teacher or school admin can willfully overlook bullying, causing psychological harm to children that has a negative economic consequence to the country. A landlord can postpone repairs just because they don't gaf, being in breach of their contract or just morally being in the wrong, incurring extra financial costs to tenants or a reduction in normal property enjoyment.

You convinced me, two strike rule!

 

[LeonardoBjj]

Considering the amount of plea deals and activist judges those "3 strikes" are more realistically 15 strikes.

- Yesterday the police here detained a guy stealing a motorbike, He was free hours after, he had 40 passages, and was let go.

 

[RoastBeast]

It's better than the current system "file a report" that never leads to anything.

 

[UberHere]

No. But I do support allowing past criminal convictions to be brought up in future trials for repeat offenders. Some judges and states don’t allow that.