Jianna Henegar (FGCU): ONE! TWO! THREE Strikes and you’re out!

One. Two. Three strikes and you’re out! Does this sound familiar? The phrase that initiated from baseball, meaning a batter is permitted two strikes before striking out. This has been turned into a law though! The three strikes law. This law was enacted by the state governments here in the United States. It requires the state court to hand down a mandatory and extended period of incarceration to a person convicted of a serious criminal offense. An article written this month brought up this very controversial social issue. I believe that if a criminal has convicted an offense regarding drugs, there should not be a “one and two strike” ordeal. Does American really want these criminals on the streets. They might have been caught for drug dealing, but is that all these people are actually doing? They could be in gangs which lead to nothing but trouble for fellow Americans. This policy for targeting and sentencing those who engaged in selling and using recreational drugs would be incarcerated with long sentences after the three strike law. Do you seem something wrong with this picture? In 1995, the three strike law required incarceration for life after three felony convictions, including a lot of drug crimes. I believe the phrase should go “one strike and you’re out!”

3 Responses to “Jianna Henegar (FGCU): ONE! TWO! THREE Strikes and you’re out!”

  1. M. Riddle (Edison) says:

    And where would you house all of these inmates? Do you want the prison in the same neighborhod where you send your children to school, or should we reactivate Alcatraz or Devil’s Island? How would we pay to build the prisons? Who would man them and how would we pay their salaries? How do we pay the $60,000+ anual cost per inmate for incarceration? Yes. Utopia is a splendid place to live, however, its costs are staggerring.

  2. Jonathan R. Jacob says:

    Three strikes is a rather interesting idea as it speaks to the idea that Prisons are for rehabilitation. By granting multiple chances, it allows for growth of the convict, hopefully putting them off of their previous activities. Unfortunately, since prisons don’t really offer any marketable skills for those within the system, it’s counter productive as it removes the felon for a little while, then reintroduces them back into the same culture they existed in before.
    The problem with recidivism here is huge because society does not give the convict any other option upon release. We set them up for failure, which then puts them in the system on a longer basis.
    The problem with recreational drug users is this; there is a clear distinction between those that use simply to unwind and cause no trouble and those that cause trouble and turn to other illicit activities to feed their habit. There needs to be a line drawn legally, as in many cases using recreational drugs is no different that sodomy; as long as it is done where it does not hurt anyone, there is no problem. Personnel liberty needs to be a factor here, but to date it has been ignored by the anti-drug culture we live in.

Leave a Reply