Eliminating 3-strikes policies: a secondary research analysis that evaluates 3-strikes policies and proposes a strategy for weaning states off of a policy that does not work

Abstract

The 3-strike policy was adopted by some states in the 1990s. Crime rates were becoming an increasing issue and the general public was starting to notice. The policy was supposed to decrease the crime rates to make people safe. The drastic sentencing on the last strike was supposed to decrease crime rates and create a safe environment for the public. This policy has done the opposite as what was intended and now states are facing multiple issues. Reversal of the 3-strikes policies could: reverse the increased crime rates, cause less financial issues, and offenders have the opportunity to get an appropriate sentencing.