![]() |
Home | Articles | Book Page | Links | Mike's Corner | Search | Studies | Contact Us |
strike offenders are under 35. In short, these are not "old" offenders who are past their criminal "prime." |
Another argument that I have heard is difficult to explain because it is difficult to understand. This is the argument that if a career criminal commits the new offense or is aware of the Three Strikes Law and commits the new offense that the law is not an effective deterrent. I disagree with this criticism for a number of reasons. First, the law assumed that career criminals would continue to ply their trade even though there were severe consequences. There are laws on the books for all kinds of crimes and offenders are aware their conduct is against the law when they commit the crime. The fact that people expose themselves to the consequences of the Three Strikes Law does not mean that it is ineffective as a deterrent or as a law. Those offenders have been identified and isolated by the law. Because of the law they will no longer be in the community to continue their criminal behavior. That was in fact an objective of the law in the first |
Second, while the law was not written to primarily be a deterrent against the commission of crime in the first instance, it was written to send a simple message that offenders could understand. It seems evident that the precipitous drop in crime rate is in part due to fewer people committing crime. It is reasonable to conclude, therefore, that some people are being deterred. That not all people are deterred is not a sign of failure. In this regard it is appropriate to quote Justice Schauer in his dissenting opinion in People v Love (1961) 56 Cal 2nd 720,745 |
"I, of course, recognize that there are persons who in all sincerity urge that the death penalty be abolished. They point to the cases that reach the courts and say: "See, it has not deterred the commission of these crimes." Certainly the potentiality of the penalty is not 100 per cent effective as a deterrent as to all criminals. But it would be absurd to claim that because it did not deter all that it did not deter any. As to each victim of each armed robbery whose life is spared because that one robber was deterred from |
39 Next Page |
Back the Badge |