My initial reaction was sympathetic but candid - no it is not perfect but it is better than the alternative. His question was "What can be done to fix it." My question became "What is it you want to fix?" His response was that we needed to reduce crime, especially serious and violent crime. This became the starting point of what became a revolution in the system and a source of continuing controversy. It also became the objective: to reduce crime generally and serious and violent crime in particular.

A group of community leaders, including judges and lawyers came together to engage in discussion on the issue. Consequently, several people sat down and formulated the concepts behind what is now known as the Three Strikes Law. I was one of those people. A general structural proposal was put together for purposes of discussion and presentation to other experts in the field.

The final concepts constituting the theoretical structure of the Three Strikes Law were taken to then Assemblyman Bill Jones who agreed to carry a written version as one of his bills. Ultimately, the bill was written by legislative drafters and others and was submitted as the Three Strikes Law. It went through considerable evolution after its initial concept. Assemblyman Jones carried the bill with significant opposition from opponents of the Three Strikes concept. Senator Jim Costa added his assistance in the Senate and then Attorney General Dan Lungren added his political support. Governor Pete Wilson placed himself squarely in support of the law and it ultimately was passed by the legislature as well as by proposition.

In understanding the Three Strikes Law, there are some things we must accept as true. There is the reality of crime and it has a number of aspects. There is the problem of what causes people to commit crime and what you do when they commit crime. Arguably we might be able to reduce crime if we could clearly identify the causes and rectify them. But, beyond dealing with the root causes of crime we cannot reduce crime unless we can deter its commission or effectively deal with those who are criminals. Which brings us back to the problem: we must accept the actuality of crime. To say that imprisonment is

Next Page
or go to... 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20
21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39
40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48