Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The New York Times)   I'll take "Prison Sentences That Are Out Of Proportion To The Crime Committed" for $200, Alex   (artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com ) divider line
    More: Followup, Mr. Trebek, prison sentences, life sentences, The Chronicle, heroin addiction, receiving stolen property, burglary  
•       •       •

22574 clicks; posted to Main » on 02 Aug 2011 at 2:34 PM (4 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



189 Comments   (+0 »)

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2011-08-02 04:32:01 PM  

BradleyUffner: mm.. you put them in prison for life. exactly what this story is about. If they prove they can't live among civilized people, then they shouldn't be allowed to.


Why should the people foot the bill for this sentence?
 
2011-08-02 04:32:28 PM  
How about less then 6 months served for the guy that killed my mom because he could not be bothered to look up from his phone to avoid crushing my mom between her car and his while she was pulled off the side of the road, 4 lanes wide, no one else on the road. Yep yep yep...
 
2011-08-02 04:32:46 PM  

FarkinHostile: Ever been burglarized? I have. Me, my GF and her pitbull all slept through it. (Too many glasses of wine on my part, but I digress.) I have personally never felt as violated as I did then, and had I or my GF woke up to go use the bathroom who knows what could have happened. It was a long time before we got over that. To know that we were helpless, that the maggot could have done whatever he wanted to us......

Sorry, but as a victim I disagree that burglary is not a violent crime. I'd rather been mugged.


Having shared the experience, I couldn't agree more. Entering my domicile is a call for blood... just no two ways about it. It's not up to me to read your intentions and react to them in the most careful way necessary when you take such a violating step upon yourself.
 
2011-08-02 04:33:35 PM  

serpent_sky: Get these people in a way that they can assimilate into society when they are released, and won't re-offend, or you have failed. Unfortunately, not only do most prisons miss this point, they tend to turn people out worse than they were before they went in.


Too many people
Too little money
Stupid politicians
Even more stupid knee-jerk voters

When you have PhDs applying for fast-food jobs, an ex-con has a snowball's chance in a toaster oven of gaining employment and returning to society. It's not just prison that doesn't rehabilitate them, society isn't letting them rehabilitate themselves once they are released.
 
2011-08-02 04:38:19 PM  

ShadowkahnCRX: And like I said before, if you want to solve prison overcrowding and slash the prison budget, decriminalize drugs. Prohibition against alcohol didn't work, led to atrociously high law enforcement costs (and the rise in power of the mob). Prohibition against drugs isn't working, is leading to atrociously high law enforcement costs (and the rise in power of street gangs). We'd solve a whole lot of problems if we'd just end this ridiculous war on drugs.



Take a look at the links cardex provided. Look at the prohibition years. Talk about insane differences in pre/post prohibition crime rates and during.
 
2011-08-02 04:44:23 PM  

FarkinHostile:
Sorry, but as a victim I disagree that burglary is not a violent crime. I'd rather been mugged.


1. "If you steal something of mine and I'm not there, it's not a violent crime." (in case you missed it)

2. I sympathize, but how you feel is not the issue... what actually happened, the facts of the crime are. Our criminal system, if it is to be as fair and impartial as humans can make it (which is imperfect at best) cannot try or sentence people to make someone else feel better. That's not what it's for.

3. Because you were in the house, yes I would classify that as a violent crime simply because of the potential threat to you and the other occupants of the house while the crime was being committed. If you were not there, no potential threat = no violent crime = no violent crime sentencing (three strikes).
 
2011-08-02 04:46:25 PM  

twyst976: How about less then 6 months served for the guy that killed my mom because he could not be bothered to look up from his phone to avoid crushing my mom between her car and his while she was pulled off the side of the road, 4 lanes wide, no one else on the road. Yep yep yep...


On his stomach in a sandbox, one to the back of the head. Cheap, relatively clean, and quite efficient.
 
2011-08-02 04:50:10 PM  
But these harsh laws are why crime rates in the US are so much lower than in other western countries.

I'm sorry, what's that? Never mind.
 
2011-08-02 05:02:33 PM  

Cyclometh: Vaya con dios, you thieving piece of shiat.


This.

Weigard: Stop breaking the law, asshole.


And This.

Caning. Not just for Singapore anymore.
 
2011-08-02 05:08:57 PM  

joaquin closet: The penal system is guilty in this case.
At $40,000 per inmate per year, we should send them all to graduate school instead.

/penal


They wouldn't apply themselves and learn a useful skill for the most part and it is likely very few people would hire them even if they did. The best course of action is termination there is no sound justification for keeping repeat offenders alive. Tried and convicted a third time one year to file an appeal that fails put to death no earlier than 72 hours after.
 
2011-08-02 05:15:47 PM  

ProEugenics: Gosling: ConConHead: Sorry. Three strikes is very generous. Doesn't matter who the victim is. You shouldn't be stealing. And just because she FACES life doesn't mean she'll get it. Probably just 25, with time off half-way through for being a non-violence offender.

However generous it may be, it also creates a 'nothing to lose' situation on the third strike.

You ever watch those police video shows? Which are the wildest, most dangerous-to-life-limb-cops-and-public chases? The ones where the suspect knows full well he's going away for keeps if he's caught. When the suspect reaches that conclusion, all inhibitions go out the window. Ramming through police-car roadblocks. Ramming through traffic. Opening fire on the cops and going down in a blaze of glory.

I don't know about you, but I would like to have it so we cut as far down on nothing-to-lose situations as possible. You got lucky this time; this guy didn't reach that conclusion. You might not be next time.

And 'well, he shouldn't be stealing then' really just ignores the issue at hand. That was the point between strikes two and three. The guy had something to lose at that point. The secondary issue, the one I'm addressing, comes up after strike three had already been committed. He didn't think this merited a strike. But let's say he did think it merited a strike. Now what? Let's say this guy were still on the loose. What's to stop him from going as big as he possibly can before his capture?

The Death Penalty


Wow, you actually managed to not only miss the point, but to suggest the only option that would make Gosling's argument even more compelling.
 
2011-08-02 05:21:32 PM  
California should just execute people over 40 who are still committing this kind of crime.

They've lived long enough to prove they'll never grow out of it.
 
2011-08-02 05:36:24 PM  

StanTheMan: serpent_sky: I just have a hard time equating the felony of theft of property with crimes like murder and rape (which I can't help but say in the first-degree, should be one strike and one strike only).

Well look up Richard Allen Davis' extensive record before he brutally killed Polly Klass, and then go tell her father three strikes isn't "fair." Lesser felonies often lead to bigger ones. That son of a biatch committed scores of property crimes that, in a non-lefty state like California, would have drawn him a life sentence long before the child murder he finally committed. The people in California became fed up with career criminals having to murder someone to get off of the streets, so they passed three strikes.


This is exactly why I think 3 strikes laws are okay (but since courts always could look at past behavior in sentencing they really serve no purpose) but mandatory sentencing is a crock. We should never take away a judge's ability to be lenient based on the individual case. A three strikes law should be in place to give the judge the freedom to hand down a much stiffer sentence than the crime itself would call for, but not force him to do so.

This type of crime is really difficult. In this woman's case, life imprisonment is more a punishment on the people than the woman. Why pay $47,000 (new window) per year to keep this woman locked up for the rest of her life? That makes no sense. Hell, we could pay her $20K a year to not rob people and we come out way ahead! I say that tongue in cheek, but mathematically it works out.

Killing her isn't really an option either, (even if you are not morally opposed to it, the government wrongfully convicts far too many people to let them kill any more than they already do) and you really can't just let her off. So what do we do?

We need something else. Another type of punishment that puts an ankle monitor on her and forces something of value to society out of her that is cost neutral, or, dare I say, profitable. I don't know really, just brainstorming at this point.

But while putting her away for life may be her just deserves, it is not a wise move for the state.
 
2011-08-02 05:37:24 PM  

Cagey B: Yes, put people like this in jail forever. But don't raise my taxes to pay for it. Also, put all of my groceries in one bag and don't make it heavy.


It can happen if they release all non-violent drug offenders, they should just arrest the chronically stupid or prone to violence, anyone using drugs should just follow portugal's blueprint and get them treatment since it has worked wonders over there.
 
2011-08-02 05:49:40 PM  

raubtier: 3 strikes obviously doesn't work in the real world. It works in imagination land, where prison is free, but not in California. She quoted the law herself, she's aware of how serious her offence is, and what the penalty for her third strike is. She doesn't see it as a deterrent, which means it's not WORKING AS A DETERRENT for people like this woman.

She's probably a kleptomaniac or has some other mental illness. Who the hell knows, there's clearly nothing we would call 'logic' going through her head.


3 strike system: doesn't work
this woman's brain: doesn't work

What the hell do you do now? When criminals are too stupid to be afraid of a life sentence, WHERE DO YOU TURN!?


She won't be stealing again, it works.
 
2011-08-02 06:01:37 PM  

raubtier: 3 strikes obviously doesn't work in the real world. It works in imagination land, where prison is free, but not in California. She quoted the law herself, she's aware of how serious her offence is, and what the penalty for her third strike is. She doesn't see it as a deterrent, which means it's not WORKING AS A DETERRENT for people like this woman.

She's probably a kleptomaniac or has some other mental illness. Who the hell knows, there's clearly nothing we would call 'logic' going through her head.


3 strike system: doesn't work
this woman's brain: doesn't work

What the hell do you do now? When criminals are too stupid to be afraid of a life sentence, WHERE DO YOU TURN!?


www.dilbert.com
 
2011-08-02 06:05:55 PM  

rewind2846: This is one of the reasons why California keeps having to cut faculty, staff and classes from its state colleges at a time when a college education is even more important to those who want even a chance at the middle class. Out of a budget of $122.7 billion for 2010-2011, California spent over $10 billion on prisons, and yet there's another round of tuiton hikes coming this fall for both the CSU (California State University) and UC (University of California) system students.

In the last budget there were cuts to Medi-Cal, reductions in UC and CSU budgets, reductions in CalWORKS funds (welfare to work through student aid), Cal Grants cuts (college tuition aid), SSI cuts, Community College cuts and others totaling $11.1 billion. Meanwhile expenditures for state prisons and county jails has skyrocketed because of idiot policies like three strikes. The state prison system is at 160% of capacity, with 33 prisons at 200% capacity, putting two and three inmates in one person cells and bunkbeds stacked three high in every available space.

In 1980, 3% of the state's general fund went to pay for prisons, and 10% paid for higher education. In 1995 spending on prisons rose and spending on higher education fell to about 8 % each (coincidentally a year after prop 184 - three strikes - was passed). As of 2010 state prisons now take about 11% of the state budget, while higher education gets only 7.5%. We spend biilions more locking people away as money-sucking economic negatives than we do to help them become educated economic positives, and it's only getting worse.

When you put pissants like this admitted idiot in prison for life (and at her age that could be another 30 to 40 years) for non-violent crimes like theft, the tax money you shred from your paycheck every week can't go toward the things you need, only down the black hole that is the prison system. As of 2010 one in six prisoners in California is doing life without parole, and by 2020 better than 16% of those lifers will be over 65. Medical care for these people is going to cost many more billions ($1.8 billion in 2010), and we will be paying every penny of it.

She did say one smart thing in the article, probably one of the only moments of clarity she's had lately, that she should do some time (if found guilty) but life imprisonment for what amounts to petty theft is a bit much.

We are going to have to make a choice:
THIS:


OR THIS:


Where should your tax dollars go?


Either way, there's no white male on the receiving end.
 
2011-08-02 06:13:25 PM  

FarkinHostile: ShadowkahnCRX: And like I said before, if you want to solve prison overcrowding and slash the prison budget, decriminalize drugs. Prohibition against alcohol didn't work, led to atrociously high law enforcement costs (and the rise in power of the mob). Prohibition against drugs isn't working, is leading to atrociously high law enforcement costs (and the rise in power of street gangs). We'd solve a whole lot of problems if we'd just end this ridiculous war on drugs.


Take a look at the links cardex provided. Look at the prohibition years. Talk about insane differences in pre/post prohibition crime rates and during.


Yep. And something the graph doesn't mention is that it's likely the crime rate would have dropped even faster if we hadn't been in the Great Depression - crime rate usually goes up when the economy sucks for a variety of reasons.

BTW, there's another point to make: Elect politicians who will stop nuking the economy and we'll have fewer criminals to throw in overcrowded jails.
 
2011-08-02 06:17:02 PM  

Profedius: joaquin closet: The penal system is guilty in this case.
At $40,000 per inmate per year, we should send them all to graduate school instead.

/penal

They wouldn't apply themselves and learn a useful skill for the most part and it is likely very few people would hire them even if they did. The best course of action is termination there is no sound justification for keeping repeat offenders alive. Tried and convicted a third time one year to file an appeal that fails put to death no earlier than 72 hours after.


"I'll take the death penalty for $1 billion, Alex."


California alone could save $1 billion over five years by replacing the death penalty with permanent imprisonment.
Average cost of death row inmate is $90,000 per year above other inmate costs.

\you sound conservative. do the math.
 
2011-08-02 06:17:59 PM  
From the biatch in The Article : "I already did the time. But to do life? For stealing? And I didn't even do anything this time. They're going to give me life for my record."

Career criminal, thinks stealing is fine, caught red handed, claims she didn't do anything. Yes, she needs to be kept away from everyone else.

She's been caught four times, and anyone who has been caught that many times has done a *lot* of crimes that they weren't caught for.

Fark her.

Aidan: But generally I don't think of stealing as a very felonious crime, so 3 strikes on stealing probably shouldn't be life imprisonment in the first place.


In order to argue that she shouldn't be harshly punished, you pretty much have to say that stealing isn't a big deal. But I don't want you, or her, or anyone else stealing my stuff. I don't want to have to worry about it. And once you decide that you're going to make a living as a heroin addicted thief, then I pretty much put you down as "sub human piece of shiat".

UseLessHuman: Decriminalize heroin. Problem solved.


Doing heroin is stupid, but I'm pretty much on the side of decriminalization across the board. However, if you're going to steal to get money, you'll do that regardless of whether heroin is legalized, decriminalized, or illegal. The heroin isn't suddenly going to be free, rent and utilities and food isn't suddenly going to be free.

She wasn't arrested for heroin, she was arrested for being a habitual thief.

ph0rk: Then why not just euthanize her?


I'd be fine with that.
 
2011-08-02 06:22:30 PM  

Joe The Plumber:

Either way, there's no white male on the receiving end.


1. Even if that was true (and it isn't), SFW?

2. Look real closely at the first picture. Plenty of white males in california prisons, a large chunk of that for drugs (meth) and violent crime (ask my brother, officer in the system for 21 years). White supremacist gangs are big here.

3. You're a dumbass.
 
2011-08-02 07:11:28 PM  

ph0rk: Why should the people foot the bill for this sentence?


Because the people are the ones benefiting from the service of removing these 3 time felons from the population.
 
2011-08-02 07:30:50 PM  

Theaetetus: My fault - I should've been clearer. The felony wasn't just theft, but rather burglary. At common law, burglary was defined as breaking and entering into a dwelling at night with intent commit a felony, so it was closer to a crime against the person: since it was a dwelling, and it was night time, it was almost certain that someone was going to be sleeping in there. So, when you burst in to steal their candlesticks, there's a good chance you'll have to beat them, tie them up, kill them, etc.
So, if you broke into the same house in the middle of the day, it might be just misdemeanor theft, but if you broke in at night, it would be felony burglary.



I see a problem with this. Simply because it was night it is harsher because of the *chance* that violence would be more likely, even if no violence was committed? We already have laws that cover assault and battery, why make a combined law? That's pretty retarded.

Also, regardless of what word play people want to use the facts are:

She has been convicted of stealing things twice. If convicted of stealing things a third time, she faces life imprisonment. This is retarded.
 
2011-08-02 07:47:15 PM  
newsserve.net

Ugghhh....lock her up.
 
2011-08-02 07:56:29 PM  
Here is my solution.

We need two islands. One for females and one for males. When someone has their third strike we need to rush them through all their appeals within 1 year. If their convictin stands, they should get to choose either the death penalty, or they get to serve out their sentence on their respective island. When we drop them off at their island, we give them $100 of survival supplies (seeds, shovel, Iodine tablets, tarp, etc). And that's pretty much it.

If these people aren't capable of being contributing members of our society, let them create their own society or perish trying.

Once per year we have them gather at a specific point and we ID them and allow anyone who has completed their sentence to leave the island. They would probably have to spend a little time being evaluated phychologically.

If anyone wants to steal this idea and make it happen, you have my eternal gratitude.
 
2011-08-02 08:16:27 PM  

nickmodaily: Here is my solution.

We need two islands. One for females and one for males. When someone has their third strike we need to rush them through all their appeals within 1 year. If their convictin stands, they should get to choose either the death penalty, or they get to serve out their sentence on their respective island. When we drop them off at their island, we give them $100 of survival supplies (seeds, shovel, Iodine tablets, tarp, etc). And that's pretty much it.

If these people aren't capable of being contributing members of our society, let them create their own society or perish trying.

Once per year we have them gather at a specific point and we ID them and allow anyone who has completed their sentence to leave the island. They would probably have to spend a little time being evaluated phychologically.

If anyone wants to steal this idea and make it happen, you have my eternal gratitude.


Throw in mounted cameras throughout the place, a little corporate sponsorship (The convicts all use BURPEE SEED for their survival!), and you have a successful franchise.

I'd watch it.
 
2011-08-02 08:27:52 PM  
You could also charge for hunting expeditions on the islands to help thin the herd. The first Hunger Games movie is coming out next year. Stay tuned for more good ideas.
 
2011-08-02 08:32:17 PM  

FenixStorm1: What if this person kept on breaking into your house and stealing stuff? Would you want them put away from a couple months?

Lets say they went to prison for a couple months then came back and did it again.

What would be your opinion of this person?

Lets say they did it one more time after they've been caught the second time. Would you agree this person has a problem? Would you substitute counselling instead of prison time?

This is the third time she was caught...it doesn't mean she hasn't committed the same crime 1000 times before. What punishment fits someone of this nature? What do you do with someone who doesn't fear prison and can't help but keep doing the same thing over and over?


I don't know... I'd have to know their skin color, gender, level of attractiveness, familial connections, wealth, creed, and political affiliations before I can answer those questions.

/mostly kidding
//more or less observing
/yay for zero tolerance?
 
2011-08-02 09:18:24 PM  

raubtier: She's probably a kleptomaniac or has some other mental illness. Who the hell knows, there's clearly nothing we would call 'logic' going through her head.
3 strike system: doesn't work
this woman's brain: doesn't work
What the hell do you do now? When criminals are too stupid to be afraid of a life sentence, WHERE DO YOU TURN!?


People like this don't see any connection between their actions and the consequences of them. They are never at fault, no matter what they do. So no, they aren't going to learn, and they end up spending the rest of their lives in prison talking to all the other "innocent" people there.
 
2011-08-02 09:42:56 PM  

BackAssward: Also, regardless of what word play people want to use the facts are:

She has been convicted of stealing things twice. If convicted of stealing things a third time, she faces life imprisonment. This is retarded.


The facts are, she's been convicted of stealing things three times, and this is the fourth time.

Caught in 1990. Received probation.
Caught in 1991. Served four hears.
Caught in 1997. Served 8 and a half years. For some reason, they aren't counting that as a strike.
And now she's been caught again.

This is a career criminal. In addition to the theft, in the current case, Trebek was hurt as a direct result of her actions.

It isn't retarded to take someone who makes a living off of being a scumbag off the streets. In fact, she's pretty much the poster child for the three strikes law.
 
2011-08-02 10:21:25 PM  
I don't agree with the idea of a three strikes law, as it means that even after you've paid your supposed debt to society by serving time, you're debt still isn't 'paid'. They keep holding it against you. That's not something the government should be doing. If you've served time for a crime, you shouldn't be forced to serve more time for that same crime. That's exactly what the three strikes law does. It forces you to serve more time for a past offense.

Why not just kill them and get it over with. What? No one's cool with that? So killing them is off limits, but putting them in a little box and waiting for them to die is fine?
 
2011-08-03 12:17:23 AM  

Leeds: Wow, what a looker.

[img24.imageshack.us image 516x389]


Ace Frehley?
 
2011-08-03 08:16:25 AM  
John Sinclair approves, or disapproves... whatever.
 
2011-08-03 09:19:46 AM  

croesius: I see no reason amuricah should be burdened with career felons. Can't we just execute her? Or is there a good reason to keep trash like this on the taxpayers dime?


I kind of hate that I can tell you're trolling, because the great thing about people who say that and mean it is that they usually haven't paid the "taxpayers' dime" in years, much less the first taxpayers' dollar.
 
2011-08-03 11:43:46 AM  

joaquin closet: Profedius: joaquin closet: The penal system is guilty in this case.
At $40,000 per inmate per year, we should send them all to graduate school instead.

/penal

They wouldn't apply themselves and learn a useful skill for the most part and it is likely very few people would hire them even if they did. The best course of action is termination there is no sound justification for keeping repeat offenders alive. Tried and convicted a third time one year to file an appeal that fails put to death no earlier than 72 hours after.

"I'll take the death penalty for $1 billion, Alex."


California alone could save $1 billion over five years by replacing the death penalty with permanent imprisonment.
Average cost of death row inmate is $90,000 per year above other inmate costs.

\you sound conservative. do the math.


That is why I am not for this on death row for 20 years we have now. We as a people need to start spending tax money on items that improve our lives instead of wasting it on items that improve nothing.
 
2011-08-03 11:57:32 AM  

Profedius: joaquin closet: Profedius: joaquin closet: The penal system is guilty in this case.
At $40,000 per inmate per year, we should send them all to graduate school instead.

/penal

They wouldn't apply themselves and learn a useful skill for the most part and it is likely very few people would hire them even if they did. The best course of action is termination there is no sound justification for keeping repeat offenders alive. Tried and convicted a third time one year to file an appeal that fails put to death no earlier than 72 hours after.

"I'll take the death penalty for $1 billion, Alex."


California alone could save $1 billion over five years by replacing the death penalty with permanent imprisonment.
Average cost of death row inmate is $90,000 per year above other inmate costs.

\you sound conservative. do the math.

That is why I am not for this on death row for 20 years we have now. We as a people need to start spending tax money on items that improve our lives instead of wasting it on items that improve nothing.


Shocking, you're proposing investing in education rather than housing criminals? I think that would improve the quality of life.

The quick bullet to the brain idea is tempting, but as a policy it sounds dangerous.
 
2011-08-03 01:34:24 PM  

joaquin closet: Profedius: joaquin closet: Profedius: joaquin closet: The penal system is guilty in this case.
At $40,000 per inmate per year, we should send them all to graduate school instead.

/penal

They wouldn't apply themselves and learn a useful skill for the most part and it is likely very few people would hire them even if they did. The best course of action is termination there is no sound justification for keeping repeat offenders alive. Tried and convicted a third time one year to file an appeal that fails put to death no earlier than 72 hours after.

"I'll take the death penalty for $1 billion, Alex."


California alone could save $1 billion over five years by replacing the death penalty with permanent imprisonment.
Average cost of death row inmate is $90,000 per year above other inmate costs.

\you sound conservative. do the math.

That is why I am not for this on death row for 20 years we have now. We as a people need to start spending tax money on items that improve our lives instead of wasting it on items that improve nothing.

Shocking, you're proposing investing in education rather than housing criminals? I think that would improve the quality of life.

The quick bullet to the brain idea is tempting, but as a policy it sounds dangerous.


It sure would be nice to have an experiment to determine the effect on crime levels. Just a policy of termination on the third offence alone is likely to have little effect on crime since locking them away for life on the third offence hasn't proven affective. I still don't think we should allow people with criminal tendency to live since they have already proven that their moral compass somehow justifies crimes against others. There have been studies that suggest it is a genetic disposition toward crime, but I do not agree with those findings. I believe it is a result of environment so more of a nurture rather than nature that results in criminal behavior. We can look at drugs, but I think if we look deeper we will discover events that led to drug use or more over abuse.

Education is a good idea, but only if force is applied to educate and the people are removed from the detrimental environment without a public record that potential employers would have access to. It would also have to be discovered at a young age so that it could be corrected earlier enough.

I guess I am for state run boarding schools for children where the normal education system does not seem to be working. I think this would be a benefit to all the children, because less time would be wasted on students that are failing the program freeing up teachers to educate those willing to learn without much added incentive. The cost for boarding schools would be great, but I think it would pay for itself with reduced prison cost and a larger work force generating tax revenue from those graduating from the boarding schools instead of dropping out of the normal system and getting stuck on the welfare system.

Combine the above with a three strike termination policy applying to all those already convicted terminating all those already serving life or awaiting execution and I think we might have something that actually has a chance of working.
 
2011-08-03 02:56:30 PM  

Lawn Maintenance Professional: raubtier: 3 strikes obviously doesn't work in the real world. It works in imagination land, where prison is free, but not in California. She quoted the law herself, she's aware of how serious her offence is, and what the penalty for her third strike is. She doesn't see it as a deterrent, which means it's not WORKING AS A DETERRENT for people like this woman.

She's probably a kleptomaniac or has some other mental illness. Who the hell knows, there's clearly nothing we would call 'logic' going through her head.


3 strike system: doesn't work
this woman's brain: doesn't work

What the hell do you do now? When criminals are too stupid to be afraid of a life sentence, WHERE DO YOU TURN!?

[www.dilbert.com image 560x170]


I really wish I had read that comic before making my original post. I'll just, uh... be... over here... ya.
 
2011-08-03 07:44:49 PM  

FenixStorm1: What if this person kept on breaking into your house and stealing stuff? Would you want them put away from a couple months?

Lets say they went to prison for a couple months then came back and did it again.

What would be your opinion of this person?

Lets say they did it one more time after they've been caught the second time. Would you agree this person has a problem? Would you substitute counselling instead of prison time?

This is the third time she was caught...it doesn't mean she hasn't committed the same crime 1000 times before. What punishment fits someone of this nature? What do you do with someone who doesn't fear prison and can't help but keep doing the same thing over and over?


Check for kleptomania?

/Pro tip: No one does illogical things--occasionally, you want to be sure the logic isn't 'my brain broke'.
 
Displayed 39 of 189 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report