A Second Look at the Three-Strikes Law

Re Proposition 66: I think two violent crimes is enough reason to keep someone locked up, even if that isn’t the name of the law. If you haven’t decided to straighten up after one term in prison, when would you? I shudder when I think of someone being let out who has such poor control of his temper that he has beaten and decapitated a dog because it reminded him of a former girlfriend. What might they do to me or my loved ones if we accidentally cross him?

Just remember, they usually have committed many other crimes that they either didn’t get caught for or weren’t convicted of. The crimes we should be letting people out of prison for are crimes like drug use. Even though I think it is stupid to use drugs, I don’t think we should lock people up for it unless, of course, they commit other crimes that hurt other people.

Marsha Lindsey

Tustin

*

I voted for the three-strikes law because the politicians said it would keep repeat violent felons behind bars. I did not know it would target nonviolent offenders. Those opposing Proposition 66 are intentionally misguiding us when they say amending the three-strikes law would release 26,000 violent felons. The state legislative analyst’s website clearly states that only those with indeterminate life sentences under the three-strikes law, if their third strike resulted from a conviction for a nonviolent, nonserious felony offense, would be resentenced.

Some 26 states have a three-strikes law, but California is the only state where you can get a life sentence for a nonviolent offense. Voting yes on Proposition 66 will not gut three strikes; it will restore the intent of the voters in longer sentences for violent and serious offenders.

Vivian Moen

Fountain Valley