with the reasons stated. It also provides a record of the exercise of discretion. While this does not compel uniformity, it does promote accountability by those vested with discretion.

Some argue we already had recidivist statutes and therefore Three Strikes is unnecessary. While it is true that we have had other recidivist statutes in the past, it is also true they were never enforced. Three Strikes has implemented a policy determination regarding habitual offenders that compels recognition of habitual offenders by requiring recognition of their past felony convictions and mandating that they be specifically addressed. It never required that everybody must be treated exactly the same without regard to circumstances. Prosecutors must determine whether or not to strike prior felony convictions in order to avoid Three Strike sentences. Judges must determine whether or not to strike prior felony convictions to avoid Three Strike sentences. In other words, discretion must be exercised in public and on the record for all to see. If there is an inappropriate exercise of discretion it will stand in the light of day. I think that is good policy and it certainly is honest policy.

A further argument regarding Three Strikes is that it fails to address rehabilitation. The law did not fail to address rehabilitation; it was not intended to address rehabilitation. The concept of the structure of the Three Strikes Law was acceptance that the individuals involved had been through the criminal justice process at Least once, if not several times, and efforts to use the system to rehabilitate them had failed. Therefore, Three Strikes accepted that rehabilitation was not the goal. The goal was public safety and reduction in crime generally and serious and violent offenses in particular. The emphasis was on the safety of the public rather than on the rehabilitation of a habitual offender.

The argument is often made that many of the prior felony offenses that qualify a person for the Three Strikes Law are "nonviolent residential burglaries" and should not be used as priors. I have already expressed my view of burglaries and need not restate it. Such felonies have been repeatedly categorized as involving a high risk of harm to human

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