Repeat Offenders. Time For A Re-Think.
I got tired of reading newspaper reports about someone who has committed 20 crimes (serious or minor) still walking the streets. It makes an ass of the law.
We know that some countries have adopted a three strike policy for serious offenders – but hang on, what about the consistent repeat offenders who commit minor crimes such as vandalism and shoplifting?
In applying the three strike system why can’t we apply the same idea elsewhere?
It could work like this. Your repeat minor offender on his 8th conviction (example: for breaking a window) having shown that he is a habitual criminal, is sentenced to a minimum sentence of 5 years imprisonment. No if’s and- no buts!
For his 16th crime, he would get a minimum 12 year sentence, for reaching that level of crime. For his 24th crime, he receives a full ‘whack’.
Now, to be clear:
(a) Depending on what the specific crime it is that they have done, those crimes can carry their own minimum penalty and should be applied.
(b) When a criminal reaches a certain number of crimes, he THEN receives AT LEAST, the 5, 12 or 25 year sentence applicable.
(c) The numbers and crimes above, I have quoted, are all open to change.
(d) “Serious Crime” and “Minor Crime” might need to be better defined.
The basis idea or principle that we must gather, is that we also have levels of “strike out” minimums – and then apply them too. All the above, also has to take into account other possible mitigating factors of an individual which is brought before a court in today’s society.
At the very least, we MUST better say and show that our consistent repeat offenders must not just be allowed to continue offending, being repeat let off with a ‘slap on the wrist’ and walk away grinning! It’s time for better crime addressing and sentencing.