I am transferring my ass to New England next year.

Apparently my offer of a 10% discount for democrats all year was not enough. Damn, I am so depressed. Two of the most interesting ballot measures on the California ticket had exit polls that surprised me.

California | Proposition 66: "Three Strikes" Law
Amends California's "Three Strikes" law to require increased sentences only when current conviction is for a specified violent or serious crime; redefines violent or serious felonies; only previous convictions for violent or serious felonies, brought and tried separately, would qualify for second and third "strike" sentence increases; increased penalties for specific sex crimes involving children.

I was so shocked to read that this passed. I have written a bad check. I admit, one time I needed my books for school and my financial aid had not come through yet. Was I convicted? No. I paid it later. 4 thousand 3rd strikers are serving LIFE TERMS in CA for shoplifting, petty drug offences, and bad check writing, etc. I am sorry, these people should be released or have their terms reduced. I don't want to continue to pay taxes to a state that effectively bestows cruel and unusual punishment for petty offenses. I predict that there is going to be a substantial drop in providers in CA. Now that three strikes has been cemented, I get to require three references in the state of California. *smirk*

California | Proposition 71: Stem Cell Research Funding
Establishes a state-sponsored stem cell research group using bonds totaling up to $3 billion; annual limit on the bonds is $350 million with General Fund money being using to pay for the bonds; department will fund stem cell research in California; prohibits human cloning by groups that receive funds.

As a former scientist, I was forced out of pursuing my graduate studies because the field that I was desirous of working in, proteonomics, was influenced by the work coming down the pike in neurogenetics, which is influenced by stem cell research. Something about basing my entire graduate studies and the rest of my career of off data coming from possibly 5 good stem cell lines seemed repugnant. It never ceases to amaze me that science usually does not perk the interest of a lay person until a famous athlete kills his wife, a former president gets Alzheimer's, or Christopher Reeves, who funded my lab, dies. Do I miss that crazy life? No way. Everyone is so happy that this passed but we have dropped 10 years behind, and most of our talented scientists have already gone to Canada and Europe.

This election really suprised me. Okay, I am now going on E-bay to shop for a military tank to get to those frostbitten hobbiests in New England who need a good tongue lashing.

http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0307-02.htm

I was thinking about Costa Rica.  Canada gets so cold.

Prop 66 - Three strikes.

The DA has discretion within three strikes provisions about whether to prosecute a case as a third strike.

The spin BS about shoplifters, etc. doing life because of the third strike is folklore.

Some of the "petty" criminal types you refer to may have had a third strike on a "minor" crime, but most of them ALSO have a long history of prior-to-three strike convictions. So, they were "popped" on thier 6th or 7th strike.

But I realize that liberals just refuse to believe that there are career criminals. After all, crime isn't really "criminal"...it's just misguided behavior.

All states have habitual offender laws and recidivist statutes . To punish a repeat offeneder may be justified, but three strikes laws are just plain overkill.

Most violent crimes are premeditated, and executed without thought of the consequences of their actions. Three strikes laws will not change this. Felonies that get resolved by a plea bargain cost about $600 to defend. A full blown criminal trial costs as much as $50,000. Most of the defendants are indigent and will use a public defender. I pay for that and so do you.

Life w/o parole, at $20,000 per prisoner for the rest of their life... Are you kidding?? What is even more sobering is the increasing geriatric prison population in CA, these inmates cost considerably more at 3x the amount $60,000.

Consider this scenario:
An 18-year old high school senior pushes a classmate down to steal his Michael Jordan $150 sneakers -- Strike One; he gets out of jail and shoplifts a jacket from Footlocker, pushing aside the clerk as he runs out of the store -- Strike Two; he gets out of jail, straightens out, and nine years later gets in a fight in a bar and intentionally hits someone, breaking his nose -- criminal behavior, to be sure, but hardly a serious crime but, that makes Strike Three. He is sent to prison for the rest of his life.

There are more than one million people behind bars in this country. 40% of inmates are illiterate 1/3 were unemployed when arrested. If you want to prevent crime, fix the CA schools and give them jobs when they graduate.Only this will reshape a crime ridden society.  BTW I figured out your handle: jail-bird in the state of California.

Reo you want to continue to pay for full blown criminal trials? - YES

In your example, strike three doesn't get charged.

The DA has the option of evaluating the case and deciding whether to pursue a third strike or not.

Prop 66 was sponsored in an effort to save a guy who was convicted of killing two people during a DUI. It had nothing to do with fairness or cost, it was a blatant attempt to "protect" one person.

I have a better solution to your geriatric population who get life w/out parole....EXECUTE THE BASTARDS!

Do some research Michelle....look for the case of David Westerfield. HE will serve life w/out parole-no I don't want to pay for him, but the alternative of him being free is too horrible to consider.

How about Richard Ramirez?  Should we let Charley Manson loose as well?

You have to draw a line somewhere, and three strikes was the line. Since we no longer live under the "code of the West", we have to accept that there will be prisons and prisoners to occupy them.

We could look at the solution from Escape From New York-Personally I think turning Manhatten into a maximum security prison would be great.

You are missing the point. Life without parole for a series of misdemeanors? It is cruel and unusual punishment.

Executions are costly as well, and tie up the courts even more. They do nothing to correct the problem.

-- Modified on 11/3/2004 11:49:59 AM

'I am not angry, but I am disappointed that I was denied justice. " Green, October 26, 2004

inmate #331 executed in Texas

-- Modified on 11/3/2004 11:55:32 AM

And, I hope, they will be spared the shame of regurgitating it or having it kill them.  

/Zin  

Do not concur.  I think it is fine that flyover seems to want to be in charge.  I think now that only copious flights full of body bags will make the past four years of blunders clear to them!  If americans have to die in lonely places like Iraq- I think it is a good thing that they will come disproportionately from the south and plains states.  As somebody once said, Ernie Pyle i think- Here is your war-.  Let them pay for it and pay in it!  But I will never let my boy go as fodder for these cumstains.  I will send him proudly when his country NEEDS him- but never for an adventure or a crusade.

Roosevelt would be disgusted with Bush and his imperial pretensions.

Maybe you could get Michael Moore in that canoe. Have to be one big ass canoe though.

What will be the charges.  Or just summarily execute them, Nazi style?  

The actual mass murderers or truly dangerous psychopaths are but a small part of the prison population.  A proportion that will get smaller with a 3-strikes rule.  All it does is save our prison industry administration time.

/Zin

-- Modified on 11/3/2004 10:31:10 PM

Although Manson is an interesting character to study?

I have no qualms about the legitimacy of the death penalty, and I have no illusions that in it's current liberalized application it does not deter, but I also believe it serves a function as retribution quite nicely.

I will concede that IF the victim's IMMEDIATE family would prefer life without parole, they should be heard and the punishment should be applied accordingly.

I go back to the Westerfield case. The masn was convicted of kidnapping and murdering a 7 year old girl (and although it was never proven, there was a strong suspiscion of sexual molestation). If the parents had moral convictions that Westerfield should spend life rotting in prison, I would bow to that desire. If the parents supported execution, then I support THAT decision as well.

Society is better off without the Westerfields living among us freely.

The argument about three strikes and misdemeanors is silly and a diversion from the intent of three strikes.

have been elected, you would get off your back and go back to being a scientist?