The purpose of the “three strike” law against offenders was originally to help reduce the number of criminals who were running around free but what it had come down to was costing tax payers more than what they had bargained for. More than 57% of offenders in California who are placed in prison for the “three strike” law were typically arrested for nonviolent offenses such as drug violations and burglary. More serious offenders who had committed more serious violent crimes were getting of scotch free if it had been their 1st or 2nd offense. 1 in 4 prisoners or 42,000 inmates are serving time in California prisons were serving life terms of 25 years to life after being placed in the prison system against the “three strikes” law. Inmates serving time increased the cost to house them in the prison systems under this law by $8.1 billion with $4.7 billion of that amount being used to house nonviolent offenders. Offenders who were placed in the prison system by the “three strike” law committing nonviolent offenses such as drug related crimes and burglary outnumbered the total number of offenders placed who had committed more serious offenses such as rape, assault or murder. Voters are the only people who are able to repeal this law but what would be left for the inmates who are already placed in prison systems against the “three strike” law?
Please join StudyMode to read the full document