EDITOR: Last weekend marked the 10th anniversary of
California’s
“three-strikes-and-you’re-out” law. It is little surprise that
this law is steeped in controversy a decade later. A Justice Policy
Institute study found that 65 percent of those imprisoned during
the decade were sentenced for nonviolent offenses. The cost to
taxpayers has been huge.
EDITOR:
Last weekend marked the 10th anniversary of California’s “three-strikes-and-you’re-out” law. It is little surprise that this law is steeped in controversy a decade later. A Justice Policy Institute study found that 65 percent of those imprisoned during the decade were sentenced for nonviolent offenses. The cost to taxpayers has been huge.
While we invest in prisons, we are ignoring the prevention initiatives that can stop violent crimes. For instance, studies show that home visitation can reduce serious child abuse a leading risk factor for violence later in life. Yet we are not funding the home visitation that this state needs.
As a result, petty criminals spend their lives in prison, while children who grow up in violent homes go without counseling or aid. Drug abusers get 10-year sentences, while young parents at risk for abuse get no help or support.
This approach is shortsighted and harmful. It may even perpetuate the kind of violence that many hoped “three strikes” would stop.
We won’t stop the violence that threatens us all until we invest in prevention and early intervention. The money now funding our prisons could be much better spent.c
Esta Soler, president
Family Violence Prevention Fund,
San Francisco
