|
On average, everyone
agrees
with
significant nonconsensus
between 45 voters.
|
|
Please read the comments from other voters below, then scroll down make your decision. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?
3 strikes and you're out
You need to register a voting profile or login before you can vote.
Reasons To Disagree
Far too simplistic a test. The primary test should always be whether a person is safe to be let back into the community.
Only if this includes white collar crime, crimes by corporations, and crimes made by politicians.
Depends on the crime. Murders and rapes should be life in prison without exception!
Disagreeing with this, as the 3 strike policy could range from anything, including the possession of weed for personal use.
No, 1 strike and you're out!
|
|
Reasons To Agree
for hard crimes, not for petty crime or driving or drugs or white collar
In some cases yes, for serious violent offendng including manufacturing and distrbuting class A drugs you should be out first time!
How chances do you really give a person e.g. you read stories of drink drivers on their 8 or 9th offence... we do have to draw the line at some stage.
Basically a good idea but it has to be applied sensibly - each case on it own merits.
murders definatley. drugs no.
Within reason. Judges need discretion within strict limits.
YES- murders(1 and your out!), drink driving, theft etc
NO- speeding and other minor traffic offences
|
Reasons for Remain Neutral
No reasons have yet been given to remain neutral.
My View
You can make your comments once you have voted.
You need to register a voting profile or login before you can vote.
Back to all voting categories
or
Back to "Law And Order"
