Topic: We should abolish the three-strikes laws
recidivist criminals can only learn their lessons the hard way. it is their fault if they do not obey the law.
repeat offenders are proven bad for the public.
repeat offenders are statistically likely to be stuck in a pattern of that behavior and so greater jail time is justified with repeat offenses for the betterment of society
repeat offenders need to be punished severely.
repeat offenders should be punished accordingly
Since most violent crimes are committed irrationally, three strikes laws don't serve as an effective deterrent for violence.
Since prison's radicalize more than they rehabilitate, three strikes laws end up creating more re-offenders by putting people away for longer in an environment that radicalizes them.
Since richer people can pay their way out of three strikes laws, the brunt of increased jail time is forced on those who are poorer and have less options in general.
Since the war on drugs and over-policing targets racial minorities most, three strikes laws disproportionately harm minority communities.
some crimes are committed out of necessity and these people need help rather than further punishment.
some offenses are so minor that a three strikes law would cause a punishment much too harsh for the crime.
some people are never going to stop committing crimes, and a three strikes law would waste a lot less time for police and save a lot of potential victims.
some people can eventually turn themselves around and those people should be given the chance to start over again.
some people deserve second and even third chances in life.  not everyone will get things right the first time around.
some people make mistakes so giving them chances before locking them up forever helps them to become upstanding members of society.
someone who keeps committing the same crimes is beyond help and should receive maximum punishment,
sometimes people make mistakes in their life. to put an arbitrary number such as three strikes is not fair.
the 3 strike law gives felons a chance to learn from their mistakes and those who don't to be justly punished.
the 3 strike law is unfair and many people are punished too severely.
the 3 strikes law doesn't allow judicial discretion in sentencing
the 3 strikes law ensures that career criminals are severely punished
The chance for rehabilitation is taken away from three-strike offenders sentenced to life imprisonment without parole.
the crime rate dropped dramatically in california following introduction of the 3 strikes rule
The data shows that states like California where three strikes laws have been implemented don't actually see decreases in crime after implementation.
The fact is that three-strike laws are an effective deterrent and thus an important tool to keep our citizens safe from crime.
the fact they are still used shows they are not effective as people still commit that third crime
the laws give criminals a reason to not commit crime.
The penal system today does little to rehabilitate first time offenders, in fact jail time often hardens individuals and entrenches them in a life of crime; this law preys on the weak instead of helping them.