Three strikes law is ineffective, severe

EDITORIAL BOARD Editor in
Chief  Timothy Kudo

Managing Editor
 Michael Falcone

Viewpoint Editor
 Cuauhtemoc Ortega

Staff Representatives
 Maegan Carberry
 Edward Chiao
 Kelly Rayburn

Editorial Board Assistants
 Maegan Carberry
 Edward Chiao

  Unsigned editorials represent a majority opinion of
the Daily Bruin Editorial Board. All other columns, letters and
artwork represent the opinions of their authors.   All
submitted material must bear the author’s name, address, telephone
number, registration number, or affiliation with UCLA. Names will
not be withheld except in extreme cases.   The Bruin
complies with the Communication Board’s policy prohibiting the
publication of articles that perpetuate derogatory cultural or
ethnic stereotypes.   When multiple authors submit
material, some names may be kept on file rather than published with
the material. The Bruin reserves the right to edit submitted
material and to determine its placement in the paper. All
submissions become the property of The Bruin. The Communications
Board has a media grievance procedure for resolving complaints
against any of its publications. For a copy of the complete
procedure, contact the Publications office at 118 Kerckhoff Hall.
Daily Bruin 118 Kerckhoff Hall 308 Westwood Plaza Los Angeles, CA
90024 (310) 825-9898

Stealing a set of golf clubs hardly seems worthy of 25 years in
prison, but according to current three strikes laws, two California
petty thieves will be putting from behind bars for a quarter
century before they see green again ““ unless the Supreme
Court says otherwise. The court will soon decide if the three
strikes’ lengthy sentences for petty crimes violates the
constitutional provision against cruel and unusual punishment.

In theory, the three strikes legislation’s attempt to
curtail repeat offenses is good. But in practice the law is flawed;
it contributes to more overcrowding in jails by people who are
non-violent. This is a national epidemic: at least 49 percent of
jailed people in the U.S. did not commit a violent crime. Last
September, the Washington-based Sentencing Project reported
three-strikes laws have no impact on crime rates ““ this
indicates the law is not working as a deterrent. Not only are these
people being punished beyond the scope of their offenses, it means
taking taxes from social programs and education.

The fact that a “three strikes” law even exists only
confirms that prison sentences are not rehabilitating offenders. If
people are committing second and third crimes, it is a sign their
time in prison has not prepared them to function in society again.
What’s needed is some carefully planned “first
strike” programs that focus on rehabilitation. Perhaps then
the number of people who are victims of crime will decrease, as
will the number of non-violent offenders in jail.

The court must recognize the flaws of the three strikes law and
give back sentencing to judges ““ especially in non-violent
crimes where discretion is particularly necessary. Somehow stealing
25 years of someone’s life seems worse than stealing a bag of
golf clubs.