Running head: THREE STRIKES Three Strikes and You’re Out Three Strikes and You’re Out Samuel Walker, author of Sense and Nonsense about Crime and Drugs, presented us in his book with forty-eight propositions that dealt with crime, drugs, and our efforts toward getting rid of these problems. A few of thesepropositions informed us on positive actions taking place inour criminal justice system, but the majority of them toldus what was not working to fight crime and drugs. One ofthose propositions that was a negative aspect of our justicesystem today in Mr. Walker’s eyes was the “three strikes andyou’re out” laws (referred to here after as three strikeslaws). He gives numerous reasons why this law is notconsidered to be an effective one. This paper will firstexplain Walker’s view on the issue and then review some ofthe current research and opinions on the matter. Samuel Walker conducted very thorough research on thepropositions he presented to us in his book. His twentiethproposition read as follows; “ ‘Three strikes and you’reout’ laws are a terrible crime policy” (Walker, 1998: 140). Walker justifies his claim by asking and then explainingthree questions. The first question is whether the lawwould actually be implemented. Walker states that “hardlyany states were using there three strikes laws” (Walker,1998: 138). California is leading the nation inprosecutions of offenders through the current two and threestrikes laws (Tischler, 1999). Fifteen of the twenty-threestates that have three strikes laws have incarceratedbetween zero and six inmates since 1993 according to TheCampaign for an Effective Crime Policy (Tischler, 1999). The second reason Walker cites is the impact of thethree strikes laws on the criminal justice system. Theselaws are affecting the system by overcrowding prisons,subjecting criminals to excessive prison terms, and costin...
