Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The problem with three strikes legislation
The problem with three strikes legislation
The problem with three strikes legislation
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The problem with three strikes legislation
Three Strikes You're Out Law
We have all heard of the newest anti-crime law, the "Three strikes
and you’re out" law. It wasn’t easy getting this law from the bill stage
in Sacramento to the law stage, because it is not a criminal friendly
law. Meaning that this law’s purpose is to bring pain, suffering, and
intimidation to criminals. Our state government was basically ran by
the Assembly Speaker Willie Brown, now mayor of San Francisco.
Brown had the power to choose who sat on what committee in the
house, and using this he could terminate any bill he did not agree
with. And with this attitude it took a lot of patients and perseverance
by the people trying to pass this bill. But how did the bill become a
bill? I will answer this question with help of the Kimber Reynolds
story.
Monday, June 29, 1992 in Fresno, California a young woman was
brutally murdered outside The Daily Planet, a restaurant patronized by
the local young people. The girl was visiting home for the summer
after being in the Los Angeles area attending school. Her and a friend
were getting into their car when two guys on a motorcycle rode up
next to Kimber Reynolds blocking her in, taking her purse, and beating
her into submission. The story made the 11 o’clock news only minutes
after her father had gone to bed. When police ran a background check
on the two suspected men, Joeseph Micheal Davis and Douglas
Walker, both men had recently been released on parole with multiple
offenses on their records. Unfortunately Davis was never brought in
because when police were attempting to arrest him he began firing,
wounding unsuspecting police officers and ultimately being killed.
Douglas Walker was convicted of accessory to murder.
Mike Reynolds, Kimber’s father, went on the radio on a local radio
show called the Ray Appleton Show, KMJ 580. There he would discuss
his outrage about how he was sick of repeat offenders being locked up
only to be released after a fraction of the sentence was completed. He
swore to the people listening that he was going to do something
about the problem, even if it takes him forever. Listening to that show
was Fresno Assemblyman Bill Jones (R). He was interested in the
issue and arranged a meeting with Mike. They discussed ideas about
how they could solve this problem.
With that in mind Mike used some connections and g...
... middle of paper ...
...victions.
There were repeated warnings about the cost to implement the new law,
but few have addressed the other side of the equation and the savings to
the state, in lives and in dollars. Had our 1993 crime rate continued
unaffected over these past few years, nearly 815,000 additional crimes
would have been committed in California, including 217,000+ violent
crimes. We would have suffered more than 4,000 homicide victims;
6000+ women would have been victims of rape. Also the savings in
dollars is between $5.8 billion and $15.5 billion since the enactment of
the "Three Strikes" law.
There has been swift and dramatic impact on crime since the enactment of
the "Three Strikes" law. The crime rate has dropped more than 30%. But
there are other factors that play a part in this reduction like crime
prevention, and community policing. However there has been a significant
drop in the crime rate. Also the predictions about cost, over populating
and others have not come true. With all of the opposition out there trying
to tear this law down I believe that California can not afford to do without
this law because it is saving our state money and lives.
Conservatives believe that prop 30 is unconstitutional. Californians will endure the biggest tax hike in years. Tax payers will cough up $6 billion annually to fund the education expense. Michelle Steele states “Prop 30 won’t fix our schools or stabilize the state budget; it will increase tax volatility and leave our children facing more of the same debt” (Steele). You can’t make a judgment like that till has been in effect for a few years Michelle Steele ...
Charges were brought against the nine adult members found in the house, for the murder of Officer James J. Ramp (McCoy).... ... middle of paper ... ... 17 Nov. 2013. https://blackboard.temple.edu/bbcswebdav/pid-3541666-dt-content-rid-41882923_2/xid-41882923_2>.
The law making process is a lengthy process. First, a representative must have an idea for a new law and they become the sponsor of this bill. The representative must present to the bill to the Clerk of the House if it is in the house (H.R. Bills), or in the Senate (S Bills). The Government Printing Office, GPO, then prints the bill and distributes it to each representative. The Speaker of the House, for further study, then assigns this bill to a standing committee within the house. The standing committee studies the bill and its contents and has two options, either to release the bill with a recommendation to pass it or lay it aside so it cannot be voted on. If the bill is released, it may be voted on or sent into debate within the house and needs a majority vote for the bill to move onto the Senate. Within the Senate, the bill must go through one of the Senate’s sixteen standing committees, and as with the House of Representatives, the bill is either released or pigeonholed. If it is released, a simple majority passes the bill. The bill takes another step into a conference committee, which is made up of members of the Hou...
dangerous man and was guilty of the murder, and who knows what else. Upon Walter’s release
The chance of reform is completely removed. Mimi Silbert, president of the Delancey Street Foundation, a half- way home for prisoners, tells the story of Albert who was sent to San Quentin Prison at age 19; by then he had committed 27 armed robberies. Under three-strikes-and-you're-out, he would still be in prison. Released at age 36, he is a caring father, works as a plumber and a substitute teacher, and has led a drug-free, crime-free life. A three-strikes law would deny this chance to Albert and to many others like him. Felons are capable of reform, but this law would deny them that chance.(Silbert)
On Friday April 24th J.P. Walker, Preacher Lee, Crip Reyer and L.C. Davis got into Reyer’s Oldsmobile and they took off on a mission to kill Mark Charles Parker. (3 other cars of men followed) They went to the courthouse/jail in Poplarville and they could not get in. So they went to Jewel Alford’s House (The jail keeper) to get the keys to the Jail. Alford went with the four men to the courthouse. When he got there he went in and down the hall to Sheriff Moody’s office and got the keys to the jail. He opened the door to the jail and Lee, Reyer, Davis, Walker followed Alford into the jail. Alford then opened Parkers cell and Lee and Davis pulled Parker out of the jail and courthouse to the Reyer's Oldsmobile. Alford then left and the men got into the car.
He also enacted the Voting Rights Act of 1965, prohibiting literacy tests in areas in which the amount of voters was under a certain number, which forced many southern states to allow more blacks to vote. As a result of his presidency, the poor and minorities enjoyed significant benefits from the more favorable legislations and more successful American legislation. 2.... ... middle of paper ... ... 3.
The book Murder in the Bayou: Who Killed the Women Known as the Jeff Davis 8?, written by independent journalist and private investigator Ethan Brown, tells the horrific true story of the bayou town of Jennings, Louisiana located in the heart of the Jefferson Davis parish. During the four year duration between 2005 and 2009, the town of Jennings was on edge after the discovery of the bodies of eight murdered women were found in the filthy canals and swamps. The victims became known as the “Jeff Davis 8.” For years, local law enforcement suspected a serial killer, and solely investigated the murders based on that theory alone. The victims were murdered in varying manors, but when alive they all shared many commonalities and were connected to
This continues to have an effect on the local government in California because every time the governments wants to impose a tax they have to put it to vote before the taxpayers if it has anything to do with local taxes. Schools are also still without some of the much needed programs that would benefit the children and help to keep them off the street. Teachers are also forced to have bigger classrooms due to the cuts. Although these propositions have helped a few people by lowering property taxes, I feel that in the long run the children are hurt due to the loss in programs such as art, music and some sports just because we want to pay a lower amount of property taxes. This is just something the people of California will have to live with.
Today there is a growing awareness of repeat offenders among society in reference to crime. Starting around 1980 there was noticeable increase in crime rates in the U.S.. In many of these cases it was noted that these individuals were in fact repeat offenders. So, on March 7, 1994 California enacted the Three-Strikes and You’re Out Law. This laws and other laws like it are currently being utilized today all around the Untied States. This law was first backed by victim’s rights advocates in the state to target habitual offenders. The reason California holds the most importance on this law is due to the fact that it has the largest criminal justice system in America, and it has the most controversy surrounding this law in particular.(Auerhahn, p.55)
It is a real tragedy that the civil rights of a substantial group of people has been trampled upon by the passing of Proposition 8. When one looks at the reasons why people voted for it, pointless arguments taken out of context are seen. As was pointed out in many of the sources which I found on the debate about the revision, California wields a large amount of influence on how the rest of the United States, and by extension, the rest of the world views issues. It can only be hoped that that will not be the case in this instance.
The section of the California Constitution being proposed for amendment is Article I, Section 19, which states: “Private property may be taken or damaged for public use only when just compensation, ascertained by jury unless waived, has first been paid to, or into the court for, the owner." This clause usually covers condemnation of real property, also known as eminent domain. Eminent domain is generally understood to provide for compensation if the claim is for public use. To take this one step further is the relevant topic of a regulatory taking. This results when the police power of the governing body is applies regulations that deprive all reasonable use of the private owner’s use of the land. To reiterate, this pape...
Before there is a law, there is a bill – and bills have many phases to pass through before these may become laws. The course materials of week three point out that a bill can originate in the House of Representatives or in the Senate – but different versions of the same bill could begin simultaneously in both chambers of Congress (Unit 3 the Congress, 9). It is possible for the President – or someone else – to write a bill, but a member of Congress must introduce the legislation through sponsorship. New bills receive a number and receive assignment to the committee best suited to examine the bill. Project Vote Smart reveals “Bills may be referred to more than one committee and it may be split so that parts are sent to different committees” (Project Vote Smart 2010). If the bill passes through the committee – or committees – the bill may get a new number before passing on to floor action. But it is not necessary for the bill to receive a new number. The foregoing stages describe the initial actions of the Legislative branch in the procedure of a bill becoming law.
Mandatory sentencing is not anything new. It began in the 1970s. The main purpose for mandatory sentencing was to try to get rid of the drug lords and to eliminate most of the nation’s street drug selling. It was to impose that the same crime would have the same sentence all over the nation. Some of the negatives that rose from mandatory sentencing were nonviolent drug offenders and first time offenders who were receiving harsh sentences. Inmate populations and correction costs increased and pushed states to build more prisons. Judges were overloaded with these cases, and lengthy prison terms were mandated to these young offenders. Mandatory sentencing is an interesting topic in which I would like to discuss my opinions in going against mandatory sentencing. I will show the reasons for this topic, as well as give you my personal brief on which I support.
Recent fire arm legislation has challenged the rights of every citizen in the state of California. Such legislation is paving the way for the confiscation of other amendments as well. Although, there are parties against the fight for guns; many do not realize the importance of people being able to protect themselves. Gun laws in California are becoming more restrictive, as a result these laws are costing innocent citizens their rights and even some lives.