NP Law & Order

[Otto]

SAN FRANCISCO, Nov. 2 - A three-judge panel of the federal appeals court
today threw out as unconstitutionally harsh a shoplifter's 50-year prison
sentence under California's "three-strikes" law, in a ruling that could
prompt hundreds of challenges from defendants sentenced to long terms for
minor crimes. (...)
Mr. Andrade was sentenced to 50 years in prison for stealing nine
videotapes, valued at $153, from a Kmart store. The court noted that
kidnappers and murderers could receive less time than Mr. Andrade, who had a
record of nonviolent, petty crimes.
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/11/03/national/03STRI.html?todaysheadlines

I've heard about that it's possible sending people into jail for a long time
even for minor crimes but this is the first case I've read about. I'm glad
that Mr. Andrade will not have to face this sentence. But in the six month
he's facing now he should make up his mind if "working" and "buying"
videotapes isn't cheaper. 50 years for $153, how much does a 50-years
sentence cost? Isn't this law from 1994 turning upside down the sense &
meaning of every law to protect the people by throwing the tax-money out of
the window that way? It would be cheaper if the society paid for the
"damage" caused by the shoplifters.
What about cleptomaniacs who don't do this by their own free will?

Otto