In 2000, California voters passed Proposition 21-Juvenile Crime. The intent of Proposition 21 was to send a clear message to offenders that breaking the law was not going to be tolerated. Punishments for many crimes were increased significantly in the hope that offenders would think twice before committing violent crimes. The primary objective of the law was to reduce crime and make California a safer place. There were arguments for and against the legislation. The public was supportive of the legislation, as were victims, prosecutors, and police officers. The public was fed up with crime and viewed the law as a means to reduce crime. The arguments opposing the law included that legislation would be costly to taxpayers and that the system could not possibly punish offenders to the full extent promised in this law. In addition, there was conflicting research indicating that increasing punishment for crime may not lead to a reduction in crime. To obtain additional details, you may research the full scope of Proposition 21.
Review the case from the link noted below. Would you have supported Proposition 21 in this case.
***MUST BE IN APA FORMAT***
0 comments