Sentencing Policy for Repeat Offenders and Three-Strikes Policy
Repeat offenders continue to commit offenses after serving their sentence for a prior offense. Three-strikes legislation is a statute that mandates a lengthy jail sentence for a defendant found guilty of a specific third-time crime, typically a significant criminal (Worrall, 2008). The conditions for applying the law vary from state to state. In some states, it is only used if all three crimes were violent and the perpetrator has already served time in prison. In others, notably California, the offender receives a lengthy prison sentence if the previous two offenses were severe or violent.
Three-strikes legislation is designed to ban repeat offenders from society permanently. Essentially, it includes longer sentences for repeat offenders (Worrall, 2008). However, new approaches should be designed when implementing a new sentencing policy for repeat criminals. For example, a new policy would include more severe sentences for repeat offenders depending on the type of previous crimes conducted. If a serious crime was conducted, a more violent form of sentencing, up to a life sentence, should be implied. Serious crimes include murder, assault, kidnapping, rape, sexual abuse, and criminal threats. As drug crimes and traffic offenses have the highest risks of recidivism, property offenders in line with serious felonies should be taken into account when creating a new sentencing policy for repeat offenders. In short, their sentence would increase in length with every previous felony.
A new sentencing policy would still be based on the three-strikes legislation. In other words, if the felon repeated several crimes, past property offenses should be counted as strikes and considered when implying new policy rules. Nearly all strict sentence solutions to the crime issue do not seem to lower crime. Some penalties, like the three-strikes rule and the death penalty, unquestionably have a particular deterrent effect. However, much evidence indicates that they—and similar sentences—are expensive to implement and unrelated to crime rates.
References
Worrall, J. L. (2008). Crime Control in America: What Works? Pearson/Allyn and Bacon.