So they caught the guy who stole my laptop

[XemaSab]

On Thanksgiving, my brand new laptop was stolen from my bedroom.

Yesterday the police caught a man they believe responsible for a large number of burglaries in my neighborhood.

The man's got a history of burglary and prowling, and he'll be eligible for three-strikes under California law.

I'm glad they caught the guy, but I feel a little shitty that the guy could be put away for life just for stealing something of mine. My laptop was expensive, but wasn't the end of the world.

Any thoughts?

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

1. I don't like Draconian laws,

and I put the three strikes provision in that category. I think each case should be looked at individually before someone is put in jail for life.

[sendero]

33. I think...

... the judge or the jury (whoever would normally determine the sentence) should have the option of applying the 3 strikes law.

If I were a juror, I would apply it in cases where 2 or 3 of the crimes involved violence or the threat of violence.

Burglary wouldn't cut it.

[Catch22Dem]

2. Hard to feel sorry for someone on their third strike

There's always an alternative to crime.

ON EDIT: Having said that, a life sentance for any kind of burglarly is rather ridiculous. I think life sentences ought to be reserved for violent crimes.

[sasha031]

6. a good deal of the time desperate people steal

due to substance abuse. In a perfect world underlying problems would be addressed and treated.

[Cleita]

7. This is why our prisons are overcrowded with prisoners who

were drug dealers or thieves, but not violent. So if the guy who stole the laptop, gets two more strikes on him, he will end up in prison, with serial killers and rapists. I think this law is really wrong.

[XemaSab]

18. He already has two strikes

He could go away for life.

Admittedly, he's under suspicion of 12 burglaries, and they have evidence linking him to 3 of the 12 burglaries so far, but still, this town has a crappy job market and HUGE drug problems. I don't know what the guy's deal is, but treating him like a rapist or murderer seems extreme.

[Cleita]

22. See, I think guys like him, especially if they are on drugs should

be evaluated for rehab. I don't think all criminals can be rehabed, but we should try with the ones who show promise. Putting someone like this away for a life sentence is only going to harden him. No doubt he will get out eventually on parole for good behavior, but then he probably will be a real menace to society.

[XemaSab]

25. Either he'll be a real menace

or he'll be so old that letting him out would be cruel. He's 35 now, and if he gets 30 years, he'll be 65.

I think we should have totally seperate facilities for violent and nonviolent crime.

[Warpy]

8. Right, and burglaries that net laptops and presumably other

big ticket items aren't quite the same as stealing a 40 ounce bottle of beer for the third time. This guy was into serious theft.

I think it was Red Skelton who gave people three chances: the first time they screwed him over it was a mistake and we all make mistakes. The second time, it was the beginning of a bad habit and bore close watching. The third time they were dead, and one doesn't speak ill of the dead. While I can't condone the DP for anything, much less theft, it does bring up the fact that the guy had two wakeup calls from the system that he was doing something very wrong and to knock it off. With the third screwup, the society as a whole has the right to protect itself, because there will be more if it doesn't.

The sentencing should be less Draconian for mere theft, though. I can see it more if it's a violent crime.

[benburch]

3. Burglary often results in violence.

It is not a nonviolent crime.

[Cleita]

12. There are differences. When I was a bartender the police always

told me to be concerned about the stick up guy, because he isn't doing it just for the money, but for the thrill as well and most likely would be violent. On the other hand the sneak artist, or burglar just wants the goods or money. He doesn't want any violence or confrontation but he could become violent if caught in the act because he will panic.

I think the laptop theif falls into the burglary catagory and is for the most part non-violent unless confronted.

[benburch]

26. Xemasab WAS home when this happened.

There was a very real chance of discovery and violence.

[Gormy Cuss]

31. This is why some states treat circumstances of burglary differently

Burglary in houses is presumed to be more serious than that of businesses exactly because of the risk of interaction with an occupant. Similarly, home burglaries at night are treated more seriously than daytime burglaries. In some states the level of the charge is determined by those circumstances. The laws don't work this way in all states and I don't know how CA handles the charges.

As for XemaSab's case, I understand why she feel bad about the 3-strikes aspect because like all determinant sentencing, there's no room for extenuating circumstances.

[Cleita]

32. Second story guys pride themselves of being able to steal

things right under the noses of the owners, while they are at home, but they could be violent if cornered true because they are also getting a vicarious thrill from the act.

[XemaSab]

37. He just opened the window and took the laptop

I was stupid to leave it that near the window. I don't think he actually entered the home.

And another thing, I've thought about this guy, and he was out robbing houses on Thanksgiving. How pathetic is that? :shrug:

[LeftyMom]

4. I'm not supportive of three strikes

but if he knew he was eligible and ran around ripping off you and your neighbors I can't see wasting much head space feeling bad for him. :shrug:

[blonndee]

5. I hate the three strikes law. I wish he could just do the

"appropriate" penalty for stealing your laptop, whatever that is.

Will you get it back? I lost a TV, VCR and diamond ring stolen out of my house and even though they caught the guy I never got mine back.

[benburch]

9. If this guy is convicted of dozens of break-ins...

and the judge decides to make the sentences consecutive, it is almost a life sentence anyway.

[blonndee]

16. Hmm, well I don't know then. On one hand it seems fair to

make them "consecutive," on the other it seems like the judge ought to at least be able to consider mitigating circumstances, like, did all the crimes occur within a certain period of time when, say, the guy was a meth addict or whatever? I'm not saying that exCUSES the crime, but that people often behave as they normally wouldn't under certain life circumstances and perhaps are more able to be rehabilitated (again, whatever that really means) than might others.

I'm also just not sure that these long, extended sentences are really the answer to such kinds of crime. And I really do have a problem with "mandatory" anything when it comes to punishment, unless maybe it's violent crime.

What do you think?

[benburch]

24. I think judges ought to have great discretion.

In a case like this... Three priors. Dozens of residential break-ins. (Burglarizing a business isn't as bad in my book.) Well, I'd say make them consecutive.

And this really does prevent crime because this person won't be in any condition to break into another home when he's 67 years old and finally out on parole.

[Cleita]

19. My husband got his car stolen once.

He did get it back, or at least the shell with a license plate back. Everything else had been stripped off. They never caught who did it, but at least the insurance got it fixed. I thought they should just get him a new car, but they actually got it rebuilt from the bottom up as good as new. For all I know some of the original parts may have been put back in it recycled from the black market.

[HysteryDiagnosis]

27. Appropriate penalty..... make him listen to

Oreilly, Shannity, and Coulter 24/7. Then when he cracks.... he will have other things on his mind than theft... hopefully.

[eppur_se_muova]

44. "Cruel and unusual punishment". Unspeakably so.

:evilgrin:

[pfitz59]

10. Steal a laptop....

....spend your life in prison.
Bankrupt a comapny/steal billion$$$....
...get 6 months in "Club Fed".
Kill 100,000 people in a BS war.....
...become leader of the "free" world!

There is no "equal protection under the law"!

[FreedomAngel82]

11. I agree with you

[Sarah Ibarruri]

13. right wingers love draconian laws

Right wingers would not feel the same about their laptop.

[BushOut06]

17. they'd probably be pretty damned worried

You know, in case someone found all their porn

[Sarah Ibarruri]

29. haha! True.

Right wingers are punitive but not about their own perversions.

[teryang]

14. Burglary of a dwelling is a quantum leap

This is a crime that endangers lives. It is most appropriate to give punishment enhancements for this crime.

[BushOut06]

15. If you're going to have a "3 strikes" law, at least amend it...

Don't just lump all crimes into the same basket for the "3 strikes". Make it so that the law applies to violent felonies such as assault & battery, assault with a deadly weapon, rape, murder, bank robbery, kidnapping, etc.

Although I'm somewhat uneasy about the whole assault & battery laws. Technically, if you merely touch someone in a threatening manner without their consent, that could be considered assault & battery. If you merely pretend that you're going to hit someone - if you bring your fist back in a threatening manner - that is classified as assault. Battery is when you actually hit someone, hence the assault and battery.

[XemaSab]

21. I agree

It should only be for violent crime and sex crimes (not even bank robbery) and it should be two strikes.

The first time, well, people get angry and make mistakes, but the second violent crime shows that the person is a danger and should go away for life.

[BushOut06]

30. Bank robbery if violence is used during it

Even using a gun during a bank robbery would be grounds in my book. Too many chances that something could go horribly wrong.

[slor]

20. I don't know XemaSab...

I mean, I do not know you, but I shudder to think of what may have happened if you had been home. This is a tough call.

[XemaSab]

23. I actually WAS home

I was goofing off on DU in the other room. :shrug:

[slor]

35. Holy Shit!

Glad you are OK.

[Raine]

39. You sure were lucky

the deadbeat brother of my neighbor broke into a woman's house and spent hours there gathering up a bunch of her stuff to take with him. Unfortunately the woman came home from work and the guy beat her to death with a metal pot that was her own. It was an awful violent murder and now the guy is in the slam (hopefully) for life.

[jobycom]

28. It's not your fault, it's a crummy law.

I don't like it, either, but you had to report the theft, and you couldn't know the consequences of it.

[Bluebear]

40. What jobycom said.

[file83]

34. We should have a "3 Strikes" rule for Presidents that LIE 3 times....

...and then IMPEACH!

Bush woulda been outta office by February 2001.

[Tulum_Moon]

36. I do not agree with the three strikes your out law

This is the most raciest and hateful law ever. It puts petty thieves in with murderers and child molesters. Above all others, judges should have discretion as to sentence their convicted. It puts sentencing out of their hands of our elected officials and chosen judiciary. This is something as a people we need to fight against.

[file83]

45. It is a stupid law - I agree. That was the point of my joke.

[petronius]

38. My take on 3 strikes laws is that they should be replaced

by some sort of 'cumulative' sentencing. After you've gotten your third strike, you serve the appropriate sentence for that crime, and get the sentence for your first two crimes added on. After your fourth strike, you serve the sentence for that crime plus the standard sentence for crimes 1, 2, and 3, and so on. That way, if you are making a habit of petty crimes the jail time will ramp up slowly, but if your crimes are major you will quickly get up into the life sentence range...

The jump straight to a life sentence after #3 seems too harsh to me, particularly for those on the low end of the criminality scale (although I'm not losing any sleep over it).

[Wise Doubter]

41. Not sure if I feel too sorry for this scumbag.

He knew the outcome, considering he knew he already had 2 strikes. I`m sure he knows the California law very well.

The ol` " I`ll never get caught again" syndrome.

Breaking and entering has big potential for heavy violence. A burglar doesn`t know for sure if someone is home or not UNTIL they have entered a home.

[Nikki Stone 1]

42. The previous two "strikes" need to be violent felonies

All the same, the law is over the top. Judges need to have discretion and twisted baseball metaphors do not make good law.

[Mr.Green93]

43. Just tell police that is not your laptop

Then they won't have evidence of a crime and this person will have another chance at a productive life.