Three Strikes and Everyone Loses, Plus the Death Penalty

Three Strikes and Everyone Loses, Plus the Death Penalty
by
Robin Hall


Now before this moronic legal maneuver got popular, was there a SINGLE test to see IF it worked? Lots of studies suggest states with the death penalty don't have lower crime rates for instance.

How about the 3 strikes and you are fucked rule? Do states with this pathetic excuse to lock people up with not enough proof for the extended sentences actually have lower crime rates?

Worse, what about the stats on that DEADLY third strike? Are there stats that PROVE the third strike crime is of lower magnitude or is it of greater magnitude, all things considered?

Say you are robbing a liquor store, your third strike if you are caught. What's worse, killing everyone involved so no ID is possible or trying to run away and hope no one recognized you? DUH.

Well, this should be enough for three strikes to end AND it should be food for thought for that stupid death penalty. NO FUCKING PERSON GAINS when there is a death penalty.

The taxpayer is going to lose, check the stats. The cost of PROVING a crime to the level of the death penalty is more than anyone wants to discuss. THEN keeping someone on death row is a tax burden very few know about and the number of years this goes on and on and on... Do the fucking math.

States with the death penalty don't have less crime, check the stats. No one gains. Everyone loses. How is this good for business or the taxpayer. Yes, George and Georgette, that is you and me.

Lets drop stupid MANDATORY laws in at least one state, revamp the system, make it tax efficient and let that serve us for a while. Keep statistics. See what happens. If someone wins, do it in the rest of the states.