argument
stringlengths 35
251
| topic
stringlengths 21
52
| example
stringlengths 37
230
|
|---|---|---|
Three strikes laws are expensive because they increase how long people are incarcerated which must be paid for by tax payers. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
three strikes laws are fair and just because there is no room for interpretation. a person knows the third offense and they are going to be hit harder. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
Three strikes laws are perfectly constitutional since the punishment isn't unusual and they are proportional to frequency of crime if not intensity of criminal action. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
Three strikes laws are unconstitutional because they impose punishments that are disproportional to the crime. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | we should abolish the three-strikes laws because this causes inconsistencies in sentences and assumes that the prior convictions were rightfully handed down. |
Three strikes laws are unnecessary because states already have ways of punishing recidivism more harshly. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | we should abolish the three-strikes laws because this causes inconsistencies in sentences and assumes that the prior convictions were rightfully handed down. |
Three strikes laws decrease intra-community reporting of crime since victims are more likely to be silenced by the perpetrator or take pity on them if it is someone close to them due to the increased punishment. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
Three strikes laws destroy families by taking away parents and children for the rest of their lives with no chance of parole. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
Three strikes laws destroy the ability of detectives to trace large crime organizations by preventing the use of plea deals to leverage information from lower level gang violence. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
three strikes laws discourage criminals from committing again | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | three-strikes laws are effective in deterring repeat offenses and should not be abandoned. |
Three strikes laws disincentive police officers from committing frivolous arrests since those they arrest on the third time will burden the system for much longer. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | three-strikes laws are effective in deterring repeat offenses and should not be abandoned. |
Three strikes laws don't distinguish between violent and non-violent felonies and often end up putting individuals away for a long time who don't pose a threat to society. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
Three strikes laws encourage a more domineering and less empathetic approach to criminal justice, which has been shown to not be functional in decreasing crime or repeat offenders. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
Three strikes laws encourage rehab spending to keep people from getting caught up in the third strike. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | three-strikes laws are effective in deterring repeat offenses and should not be abandoned. |
three strikes laws enforce the stance that recidivism will not be tolerated, people will be held accountable for their actions. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | three-strikes laws are effective in deterring repeat offenses and should not be abandoned. |
three strikes laws gives people more chances to straight their act | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | three-strikes laws have lowered crime rates in many areas |
Three strikes laws have not decreased the number of crimes being committed, so they have no purpose. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
Three strikes laws increase court fees and court clog because individuals facing a third conviction will deploy everything possible in court to try and avoid the third strike. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
Three strikes laws increase recidivism because people in jail for long periods must join a gang to survive and have a good quality of life. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | three-strikes laws are effective in deterring repeat offenses and should not be abandoned. |
Three strikes laws increase sentences, allowing prosecutors and police to get confessions and testimony from low level offenders. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | three-strikes laws can disproportionally penalise minor offenders and addicts, causing overcrowding in prisons some of these people need help, not draconian punishment. |
Three strikes laws increase the state of incarceration, pushing America into a more authoritarian state. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
Three strikes laws increase violence against law enforcement since an accused criminal facing the potential for a life sentence is more likely to fight back against law enforcement to escape. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
three strikes laws keeps our communities safe by locking up repeat offenders | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | three-strikes laws are effective in deterring repeat offenses and should not be abandoned. |
three strikes laws lack nuance and fail to evaluate circumstances around crimes committed. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
Three strikes laws lead to more people being put in jail which ends up being a burden on tax-payers and federal funding. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
Three strikes laws lead to prison over-population since more offenders are put away for a longer time. This leads to worse prison conditions and more violence in prisons. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
three strikes laws lock up those who don't learn from their past | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
Three strikes laws make conviction harder because juries do not want to put people into jail for long periods when they haven't committed serious crimes. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
three strikes laws make people less likely to be repeat offenders due to harsher punishments. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
Three strikes laws misdiagnose the root problem in the criminal justice system by targeting people who have already committed crimes instead of working to keep people from committing them in the first place. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
Three strikes laws often punish those who have been pushed into crime by their socioeconomic background, which is unjust. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
Three strikes laws prevent judges from having flexibility that would allow them to assign rehabilitation programs that would be more effective than jail. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
Three strikes laws prevent judicial discretion by preventing judges from considering mitigating/extenuating circumstances in sentencing, which unjustly punishes people who deserve lower sentences only because of the number of crimes they've committed. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
Three strikes laws put people in jail for long periods despite committing only minor offenses. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
Three strikes laws reduce the amount of felony arrests. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | three-strikes laws are effective in deterring repeat offenses and should not be abandoned. |
Three strikes laws reduce the power of judges and discretion in the court room, making judgments shallower. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
Three strikes laws ruin young people's lives by preventing them from being accessing education and jobs that would pull them out of a life of crime by prolonging their time in jail during their formative years. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
three -strikes laws take discretion away from judges. a person committing a minor crime could be sentenced to life if he had a criminal history from long ago. these laws backlog our courts, cram our prisons. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
three strikes laws unfairly target non violent offenders when they get multiple drug charges | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
three-strike laws do not act as a sufficient deterrent, people who commit crimes should be imprisoned earlier | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
three-strike laws are intolerant of special circumstances. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
three-strike laws are more than fair and are necessary to get the point across those who are repeat offenders that the same crime cannot be repeated without additional consequences. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
three-strike laws are too harsh when the felonies are for non violent crimes such as prostitution and tax fraud. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
Three-strike laws disproportionately affect minorities in that they target low-impact street crime as opposed to high-impact white collar crimes. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
three-strike laws ensure that serious repeat offenders are dealt with as strongly as possible to ensure the safety of the public and punish their crimes accordingly. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | three-strikes laws are effective in deterring repeat offenses and should not be abandoned. |
three-strike laws give a clear message to offenders who may be in danger of re-offending, that doing so would be met with more severity than their first offense. that way it works as a clear deterent. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws promote safety by keeping habitual offenders in jail and off the streets. |
three-strike laws inhibit the possibility of rehabilitation by giving increasingly severe sentences, until life is the final option. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
three-strike laws keep repeat offenders from being let out after a very short prison term. it will prevent many serious crimes. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | three-strikes laws are effective in deterring repeat offenses and should not be abandoned. |
Three-strike laws lead to expensive trials. Three-strike offenders will demand a court trial rather than accept a plea bargain (which costs a fraction of the price of a full-blown trial). | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
three-strike laws minimize the prison population and are beneficial | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
three-strike laws seriously limit the ability of offenders to be rehabilitated in society by giving them increasingly severe sentences that ultimate result in lifetime incarceration. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
three-strike laws should be abolished as it negatively impact minorities and people of color who are more likely to commit crime due to poverty issues. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | we should abolish the three-strikes laws because this causes inconsistencies in sentences and assumes that the prior convictions were rightfully handed down. |
three-strike laws should be abolished because employers abuse the legislation | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
three-strike laws should not be abolished because they enable employers to act rapidly to dismiss staff who act inappropriately | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | three-strikes laws are effective in deterring repeat offenses and should not be abandoned. |
three-strike offenders are habitual criminals and should be treated as such | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
three-strikes does not take in to account mitigating circumstances | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
three-strikes law is a primary obligation of the criminal justice system to establish clear and certain penalties for crime | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | three-strikes laws can disproportionally penalise minor offenders and addicts, causing overcrowding in prisons some of these people need help, not draconian punishment. |
three-strikes laws act as a very effective deterrent to crime, and this zero tolerance approach has been been responsible for making cities far safer. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
three-strikes laws are a major reason for overcrowding in our prison system. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
Three-strikes laws are a necessary tool to get the most violent offenders off the streets and keep them from harming more people. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
three-strikes laws are an example of institutional racism, as they are disproportionately applied to minority offenders for petty crimes. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
three-strikes laws are effective in deterring repeat offenses and should not be abandoned. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
Three-strikes laws are incredibly racist. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
three-strikes laws are ineffective in reducing the recidivism rate. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
three-strikes laws are inherently flawed as per their definition, people are judged seriously at their third strike. thus even if the first strike is a serious strike, bad person could go scot-free. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
three-strikes laws are not well designed for our criminal justice. any crime is crime even minor one. any offender should face the justice | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
three-strikes laws are overly draconian, and result in overcrowded prisons and judicial miscarriages. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
three-strikes laws are overly harsh and do not take nuance into account. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | we should abolish the three-strikes laws because this causes inconsistencies in sentences and assumes that the prior convictions were rightfully handed down. |
three-strikes laws are too harsh and lack the nuance needed to truly ensure the punishment fits the crime. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
three-strikes laws avoid putting non-serious crime offenders in jails | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
three-strikes laws can act as a deterrent for serial criminal behavior. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | three-strikes laws are effective in deterring repeat offenses and should not be abandoned. |
three-strikes laws can disproportionally penalise minor offenders and addicts, causing overcrowding in prisons some of these people need help, not draconian punishment. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
three-strikes laws can help keep the violent and unruly off of the streets of regular society. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | three-strikes laws are effective in deterring repeat offenses and should not be abandoned. |
three-strikes laws can lead to extreme punishments that don't fit the crime | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
Three-strikes laws clog the court systems. Defendants will take their cases to trial, rather than accept a plea bargain, in an attempt to avoid a life sentence. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
three-strikes laws criminals who can't be rehabilitated off the streets. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
three-strikes laws don't consider the proportionality of the crimes committed and would offer disproportionate punishment to people who commit petty crimes. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
three-strikes laws don't set out what they intended to do, lower prison populations and crime rates, they need to be abolished | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
three-strikes laws have been proven to lower crime rates, since they act as an excellent deterrent to unlawful behaviour across the spectrum. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | three-strikes laws are effective in deterring repeat offenses and should not be abandoned. |
three-strikes laws have lowered crime rates in many areas | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
three-strikes laws have proven to be effective in reducing crime | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
three-strikes laws have the potential to increase violence against law enforcement officers facing criminals who are more likeyto resist arrest if facing a mandatory life sentence | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
three-strikes laws help people realize that what they did was wrong and change their ways before they end up in jail for life. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
Three-strikes laws increase overcrowding in prisons by incarcerating, for life, three-strike offenders. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
Three-strikes laws increase taxpayer costs by increasing the number of prisoners imprisoned for life, a very costly expense. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
Three-strikes laws increase the likelihood that twice-convicted felons would resist arrest violently, leading to increased violence against police officers, as well as potential harm to bystanders. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
three-strikes laws keep the worst of the worst criminals off the streets | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
three-strikes laws lead to overcrowded prisons which simply costs too much money to house inmates for life after committing three crimes. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
three-strikes laws lead to overcrowding in prisons, as less serious offences become punishable by incarceration. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
three-strikes laws makes criminals less likely to reoffend. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
three-strikes laws my wrongfully imprison someone whose crime wasn't minor and absolutely not worth a life sentence. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
three-strikes laws often lead to harsh punishments that do not fit their crimes | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
three-strikes laws overtax the prison system but overloading them with non-violent criminals who could be otherwise rehabilitated. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
Three-strikes laws promote safety by keeping habitual offenders in jail and off the streets. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | three-strikes laws are effective in deterring repeat offenses and should not be abandoned. |
three-strikes laws reduce recidivism rates. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
Three-strikes laws reduce the rate of crime in a community. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | three-strikes laws have lowered crime rates in many areas |
three-strikes laws remove violent, repeat offenders from the public and reduces crime rates in areas that adopt such laws. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | three-strikes laws are effective in deterring repeat offenses and should not be abandoned. |
three-strikes laws should be allowed to continue as its a important part of the justice system and it allows people to be able to learn from their lessons. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | we should abolish the three-strikes laws because this causes inconsistencies in sentences and assumes that the prior convictions were rightfully handed down. |
three-strikes laws should not be abolished because they are effective at lowering the overall crime rate. | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
three-strikes punishes repeat offenders | We should abolish the three-strikes laws | Three-strikes laws are too harsh. Many people who have committed non-violent felonies - and in some cases, misdemeanors - have been given mandatory life sentences. |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.