INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this study is to examine the efficacy of the three strikes
law. The research study will document the impact of the three strikes law
on criminal behavior and activity, in an attempt to assess whether the law
and similar laws act as an effective deterrent to crime. The research will
be conducted of criminal activity in three major cities across the United
States. The three strikes law was developed in California as a mechanism
meant to lengthen sentences and deter crime, especially crime committed by
repeat offenders. Recent studies have suggested however, that the three
strikes law is less effective than its initial intended.
Among the problems cited by citizens include its tendency to unfairly
discriminate against certain minority populations, and the tendency to
sentence individuals who normally may be classified as non-violent, minor
criminals, as felony offenders. A majority of these "felony offenders" are
serving sentences that are generally from 25 years to life, for what might
be considered relatively minor crimes.
The aim of this study is to investigate to what extent the three strikes
law has actually worked in deterring crime. In addition to this, this
study proposes to examine to what extent the three strikes law has resulted
in successful incarceration of potentially violent criminals. In order to
accurately assess the efficacy of the three strikes law, I have developed
the following preliminary hypothesis:
Null Hypothesis: The three strikes law is not an effective deterrent of
crime, and often results in the unnecessary incarceration of non-violent
criminals
Alternative Hypothesis: The three strikes law is an effect crime
deterrent, and is responsible for successfully reducing the proliferance of
violent criminals on the streets.
This study will also aspire to examine the extent to which three strikes
laws may unfairly discriminate against certain...