Topic: We should abolish the three-strikes laws

Argument: the three strikes law deters repeat offenders from repeating their crimes because the fourth time, they will be punished more severely,

Argument: the three strikes law does a great deal to inhibit the urge to commit criminal behaviors.

Argument: the three strikes law is an effective deterrent to all but the most hardened criminals and should be maintained to stop the development of career criminals especially amongst the youth.

Argument: the three strikes law is filling our prisons with people who have not commited serious crimes.

Argument: the three strikes laws would deter crime since it involves such a harsh punishment.

Argument: the three-strike law acts as a very effective deterent to crime, and keeps down the prison population.

Argument: the three-strikes law has limited the amount of smaller crimes like robbery so it has been effective and should remain.

Argument: the three-strikes law works just the way it should and puts away those that deserve to do time for repeat offenses

Argument: the three-strikes laws helps deter people from committing further crimes

Argument: the three-strikes laws helps deter serious crime.