Letters to the Editor by Barbara Brooks
Letter to the Editor
Orange County Register
Printed on July 31,
2001
3 strikes law too harsh; let's change it fast
After
reading "Three Strikes Reform" on Sunday, July 30, how can we justify sending
people to prison for 25 years to life for non-violent offenses? Joe Klaas, the
grandfather of Polly Klaas, is a person of rare wisdom and courage. The Klaas
family supported the initiative that launched the three-strike law but soon saw
that this law would also target men and women who commit non-violent and
non-serious offenses. At the age of 81 Mr. Klaas still fights to right a wrong.
Can we do no less? There are thousands like me who voted for this law, having
been told, as the Klaas family was told, that this law was to get rid of the
violent criminals, such as rapists and murderers. Now, we are sending
non-violent people away for life, to a violent place that will forever destroy
them and their families' lives. I hope we will accept the challenge, take 5
minutes of our time to write a letter or make a phone call to our state
legislators telling them to support amending this law. Together, we can do
it.
Barbara J. Brooks
Fullerton, CA 92838
Printed in O.C. Register on 11-6-01
End the 3 strikes law
I am glad to hear that the judges and courts are finally changing their
attitude about the California 3-Strike law. [Court deals blow to ‘3
Strikes law, Front Page, Nov. 3]. At the time the initiative was being
promoted, Secretary of State Bill Jones and former Governor Pete Wilson were
telling us that the law would put away violent criminals. They failed to
mention that it would also target the non-violent repeat offenders.. And why
wouldn't these criminals be repeat offenders? Since when does the State of
California ever do anything positive to help the prisoner while inside or when
released? A three-striker can only hope to be paroled in 25 years. With
deceased family members, no friends and $200 from the State of California, what
can we expect but failure. But no non-violent offender deserves to spend his or
her life in prison, even if he or she is a nuisance to the courts.
Barbara J. Brooks
Fullerton, CA 92838
Letter to Editor
January 18, 2002
3-strikes law; Let's make
time fit the crime
Some politicians will never admit that ‘three
strikes' is a bad law for non-serious and non-violent offenders {"Groups eye
tighter ‘3-strikes' criteria," Region, Jan. 16}. They fail to inform us
there are more than 600 people serving 25-years-to-life sentences for drug
possession. True, the three-striker is no angel. His prior offenses are either
serious or violent. The serious list includes burglary of an unoccupied
residence or garage (as a minor stealing a bike from a garage 20-30 years ago).
The law enhances misdemeanors to felonies because of a past record. Then it
enhances the offense to a "strike." Some politicians find ways to justify
sending a person who has serious or violent priors (no matter how old) to
prison for a minimum of 25 years to life. But if a person has one or more
"driving under the influence" convictions on their record, the law doesn't
throw them in jail for a minor traffic violation. The law waits for another DUI
violation. So should the three-strike law apply only to violent offenses? Let
the time fit the crime. Search for the truth and support change on this law.
Barbara J. Brooks Fullerton
Please send questions or comments to factsla@sbcglobal.net.
Everything on this web site can be distributed to the general public,
reprinted, or reposted without permission of Families to Amend California's
3-Strikes.
Date last modified: 1/20/02.