Prop 57 Vote No
Proposition 57 is flawed in that it doesn’t define what “nonviolent” crimes are. Current law defines 23 crimes as “violent.” Many others not on that list but that the average person likely would consider to be violent will fall under Proposition 57’s “nonviolent” scope.
Those convicted of crimes from rape of an unconscious person to hostage taking to assault with a deadly weapon to arson could benefit from Proposition 57. Putting these new privileges into the state Constitution will make them much harder to change if modifications are deemed necessary.
Opponents -- including the California Republican Party, Riverside County DA Mike Hestrin and legions of prosecutors and law enforcement associations – argue 30,000 current state inmates and the 7,500 inmates entering the system each year who will be eligible for early release under Proposition 57 will be an unacceptable threat to communities across California.
Measures like this can backfire. AB109, which cut state prison numbers, swamped local lockups to the point that many sheriffs have been releasing inmates early due to their own crowding issues. Proposition 47, anecdotally at least, seems to have spurred increases in crimes like auto break-ins and even gun thefts due to its raising of the “value” of a misdemeanor crime to anything below $950.
Reforming early release policies to encourage and reward true rehabilitation that leads to more convicts becoming productive members of society and help end the revolving door of recidivism is a noble goal. Proposition 57 falls short of that mark, however.
Lawmakers should do the actual reform through smart, well-drafted legislation rather than leaving it yet again to the voters and an initiative with potentially dangerous unintended consequences. Vote no on 57.
Dave Laskey is the owner of 510 Bail Bond located in Fremont California.
