The majority of those responding to this week’s online poll said they would not vote to amend California’s Three Strikes law. About 54 said they would vote to revise it; while 41 percent said they wouldn’t. Five percent wasn’t sure. Here were some of the comments.
——
“At approximately $50,000-plus per inmate per year, California needs to revisit its incarceration laws. A majority of offenders being held in jails, prisons, on probation, and within the incarceration system as a whole are non-violent offenders. There are highly effective, alternative methods of punishment that are cost-effective.”
——
“I think I could only support such a ballot if the money ‘saved’ from incarceration would go directly to schools. There is a strong connection between education and economic status, so supporting those that may turn to nonviolent crime seems to be a sensible approach.”
——
“Let our elected representatives write and change laws. These propositions are full of errors and a waste of taxpayers time and money. How about a proposition to end future propsitions?”
——
“Lock them up for good. Two breaks is more than enough.”
——
“I thought Three Strikes was a ridiculous law in the first place, not based on any evidence from the field of criminology but merely an emotional response to a problem. I will vote for any measure that revises or dumps it.”
——
“I don’t cast a vote. I vote; my vote is to not vote. I quit many years ago because I didn’t see any point in voting when lobbyists control the legislature and the electoral college decides presidential elections. Now if I was to cast a vote I most certainly would vote yes on Prop 36. Thank you, I’ll climb down from my soap box now.”
——
“Sorry, I have no sympathy for those convicted of three strikes. If you don’t get it the first two times you deserve to be locked up.”
——
“No chance….we should be executing this scum of the Earth.”
——