The 3 strikes law is just a tool for congressman to get elected. They claim they will "up the war on crime." Instead of trying for more jobs, (more opportunity) which would lower the crime rate, they add a silly 3 strikes law. Obviously getting 25 years for shoplifting 3 times is stupid. The punishment should fit the crime...goes to show how stupid the political climate has become

Hey... another problem in the US that could be easily solved by a better education system...

Someday a politician will think of this.

Does that mean that 97% of the population have never broken the law? I'd say that given putting criminals (charged with anything) in prison is a fair and constructive concept, its amazing its not more.

I think more than 3 in every 100 i know have committed a crime, and a barely know anyone besides law-abiding people.

Does that mean that 97% of the population have never broken the law? I'd say that given putting criminals (charged with anything) in prison is a fair and constructive concept, its amazing its not more.I think more than 3 in every 100 i know have committed a crime, and a barely know anyone besides law-abiding people.

(So I don't think it's too much. It's probably too little, but as Khaiy says: "[color="#1C2837"]Not all crimes will land you in prison, and not all criminals are caught".)

Hey... another problem in the US that could be easily solved by a better education system...

Someday a politician will think of this.

I think it might involve environmental problems also. Lack of education might be part of it, but there are probably a lot more causes. As mentioned jobs for one. A person wouldn't steal if they had a good job. (Or so I think, but then again people act irrationally for a high).

Not all crimes will land you in prison, and not all criminals are caught.

Does that mean that 97% of the population have never broken the law? I'd say that given putting criminals (charged with anything) in prison is a fair and constructive concept, its amazing its not more.I think more than 3 in every 100 i know have committed a crime, and a barely know anyone besides law-abiding people.

(So I don't think it's too much. It's probably too little, but as Khaiy says: "[color="#1C2837"]Not all crimes will land you in prison, and not all criminals are caught".)

I think of people I know over 50% have committed a crime that would apply to the three strikes laws, but I only know I think 3 people who have gone to prison for it.

I think that expense is covered by forced labour. If I'm not mistaken putting citizens in prison is a lucrative buisness in the US hence why there's so many prisoners.

You have any facts to back that up?[/quote]

Please see 2.20 to 3.06 in that video I linked in the OP. I admit its just things a respectable T.V. presenter said in his show, which in this particular I haven't followed up any further (being less concerned about the work/buisness side of it and more concerned about the sheer number of people being put in prison).

EDIT: also others in this thread have made some interesting statements on that point.

P.S. I'm glad and relieved to see that some people at least realise there are worrying aspects to the issue raised by the OP.

Hey... another problem in the US that could be easily solved by a better education system...

Someday a politician will think of this.

But what happens when the people themselves are unwilling to learn?

[quote name='way2lazy2care' timestamp='1306860289' post='4817929']
Hey... another problem in the US that could be easily solved by a better education system...

Someday a politician will think of this.

But what happens when the people themselves are unwilling to learn?
[/quote]


...then we'd have the same issues that we have today, minus forcibly marginalizing people by restricting their ability to learn via a crappy system. It's a non-unique harm, and a pretty sweeping thing to posit anyhow.

There's a difference between people making the (terrible) decision not to learn and maintaining a system that removes that decision from the learners.