I didn't much care for the posting of the Santa Clara County's DA opinion as it's full of mis-information. But opinions are like a bungholes we all have one.

So in response here's a letter of support and the facts of prop 66 as written by Joe Klass the Grandfather of Paully Klass.

YES ON 66



By Joe Klaas





In 1994, California voters made a resounding statement about criminals who repeatedly committed violent crimes after getting second and third chances. Enough. No more violence. Send these criminals to prison for a very long time.



Californians still feel that way. But the passage of 10 years time has provided the benefit of additional perspective, and the realization that the law passed in 1994 can be made better, fairer, more sensible, and far more cost effective. Thats why polls are showing that voters are overwhelmingly supporting Proposition 66 on the November ballot.



Proposition 66 makes the following important changes to Californias current three strikes law:



It requires the third strike, which imposes a 25-year-to-life sentence, to be for a serious or violent crime.



It narrows the list of strikes to include truly violent or serious crimes. For example, lighting a trash can on fire or stealing a tool from an unoccupied garage would no longer be strikes that can bring life sentences. Theyre still crimes, however, and will still be punished appropriately



It allows re-sentencing for those serving life sentences if their third strike resulted from a non-serious, non-violent offense. Thats about 4,200 non-violent offenders.



It requires strikes to result from separate trials, to ensure that the law applies to repeat offenders as originally intended.

And it increases the punishment for sex crimes against children, allowing prosecutors the discretion to seek one strike sentences in the worst cases.



These are all common sense changes to the current law, based on a simple premise: that criminals who hurt other people and commit violent acts repeatedly should be punished more severely than people who dont.



For example, under current law, if two individuals each have two burglaries on their records, and one shoplifts and the other commits a rape, they both receive the same sentences! Thats ridiculous. Everyone agrees that rape is a far more heinous crime than shoplifting and should be punished more severely. Conversely, the shoplifter is not as monstrous as the rapist and should be punished accordingly. Proposition 66 fixes this absurdity.



Under Proposition 66, punishments fit the crimes. They are fair, logical, humane and cost-effective. All crimes are still punished; there is no free ride for anyone. No criminal now serving time for a violent or serious crime will have his sentence shortened by one day. Petty drug offenders and shoplifters will no longer receive life sentences; and violent criminals will receive the stiff sentences they deserve.



The non-partisan legislative analyst estimates that Proposition 66 will stop the waste of hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars each year. The incarceration of non-serious, non-violent offenders for very long sentences has resulted in a huge increase in the bloated budget of the State Department of Corrections: a 50% increase, or $2 billion a year, in the past five years alone! Thats money that is robbed from necessary programs such as higher education, transportation, health care, and environmental protection.



The colossal waste is illustrated by these facts: 57 percent of third strikers and 65 percent of second-strikers are now serving costly prison terms for non-serious, non-violent offenses.



Opponents of Proposition 66, financed entirely by the prison guards union, made rich and powerful by that bloated prison budget, are trying to scare us with misinformation about huge numbers of violent criminals wholl be released if the measures passes. Heres the simple truth: not one person now in prison for a serious or violent offense will be released one day earlier by Proposition 66.



The three-strikes law was, and still is, a good idea, but it needs fixing. Proposition 66 provides the fix, and restores the law to what voters intended when they approved it a decade ago: very tough sentences for repeat violent criminals, fairer sentences for other offenders, and the most efficient possible use of taxpayer dollars.

Available at
http://www.change-links.org/YESON66.htm



RPinSD

I didn't much care for the posting of the Santa Clara County's DA opinion as it's full of mis-information. But opinions are like a bungholes we all have one.

So in response here's a letter of support and the facts of prop 66 as written by Joe Klass the Grandfather of Paully Klass.

YES ON 66



By Joe Klaas





In 1994, California voters made a resounding statement about criminals who repeatedly committed violent crimes after getting second and third chances. Enough. No more violence. Send these criminals to prison for a very long time.



Californians still feel that way. But the passage of 10 years time has provided the benefit of additional perspective, and the realization that the law passed in 1994 can be made better, fairer, more sensible, and far more cost effective. Thats why polls are showing that voters are overwhelmingly supporting Proposition 66 on the November ballot.



Proposition 66 makes the following important changes to Californias current three strikes law:



It requires the third strike, which imposes a 25-year-to-life sentence, to be for a serious or violent crime.



It narrows the list of strikes to include truly violent or serious crimes. For example, lighting a trash can on fire or stealing a tool from an unoccupied garage would no longer be strikes that can bring life sentences. Theyre still crimes, however, and will still be punished appropriately



It allows re-sentencing for those serving life sentences if their third strike resulted from a non-serious, non-violent offense. Thats about 4,200 non-violent offenders.



It requires strikes to result from separate trials, to ensure that the law applies to repeat offenders as originally intended.

And it increases the punishment for sex crimes against children, allowing prosecutors the discretion to seek one strike sentences in the worst cases.



These are all common sense changes to the current law, based on a simple premise: that criminals who hurt other people and commit violent acts repeatedly should be punished more severely than people who dont.



For example, under current law, if two individuals each have two burglaries on their records, and one shoplifts and the other commits a rape, they both receive the same sentences! Thats ridiculous. Everyone agrees that rape is a far more heinous crime than shoplifting and should be punished more severely. Conversely, the shoplifter is not as monstrous as the rapist and should be punished accordingly. Proposition 66 fixes this absurdity.



Under Proposition 66, punishments fit the crimes. They are fair, logical, humane and cost-effective. All crimes are still punished; there is no free ride for anyone. No criminal now serving time for a violent or serious crime will have his sentence shortened by one day. Petty drug offenders and shoplifters will no longer receive life sentences; and violent criminals will receive the stiff sentences they deserve.



The non-partisan legislative analyst estimates that Proposition 66 will stop the waste of hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars each year. The incarceration of non-serious, non-violent offenders for very long sentences has resulted in a huge increase in the bloated budget of the State Department of Corrections: a 50% increase, or $2 billion a year, in the past five years alone! Thats money that is robbed from necessary programs such as higher education, transportation, health care, and environmental protection.



The colossal waste is illustrated by these facts: 57 percent of third strikers and 65 percent of second-strikers are now serving costly prison terms for non-serious, non-violent offenses.



Opponents of Proposition 66, financed entirely by the prison guards union, made rich and powerful by that bloated prison budget, are trying to scare us with misinformation about huge numbers of violent criminals wholl be released if the measures passes. Heres the simple truth: not one person now in prison for a serious or violent offense will be released one day earlier by Proposition 66.



The three-strikes law was, and still is, a good idea, but it needs fixing. Proposition 66 provides the fix, and restores the law to what voters intended when they approved it a decade ago: very tough sentences for repeat violent criminals, fairer sentences for other offenders, and the most efficient possible use of taxpayer dollars.

Available at
http://www.change-links.org/YESON66.htm



RPinSD
Has anyone seen or heard how her father feels about Prop 66?

Yes, we've seen and heard how her father feels. And we agree that violent offenders such as the one who took his daughter's life should have longer, tougher sentences (even the first time around), but we don't agree that the same sentence fits all circumstances. We don't think that someone who has been out of prison for 10 years, holding down a job, contributing to society, who while helping someone out at their mobile home, should be sentenced to 25 to life for constructive posession of a firearm, because the elderly couple he was helping to move owned a 22 caliber pistol that was legally registered and in the home. He knew nothing about it and actually told the woman to tell the police it was there (after she whispered in his ear that she had a weapon on the premises) when they came by for some other reason. That's only one of hundred's of stories. This law is insane and needs to be changed!!