This report will lie out some of the key aspects of the "Three Strikes Law." Is this law Good or bad in the opinion of the family of the convicted? Where did this law come from and why? Does it affect the percentage of crime? What happens after you receive three strikes? Would a black male in the early 1930's have the chance at three strikes? Where does the money for keeping the convicts come from? The "Three Strikes Law" came into affect in March of 1994.(Newsweek 29 August) The first two strikes have to be serious offenses. Where as one person is convicted of burglary then eight years later convicted of grand theft auto, once he is released if he is caught stealing a piece of gum he will go to jail for the rest of his life. Most of the money will come from the schools grades kindergarten through twelfth grade in high school. The second leading contributor will be health and welfare grants. Ironically the fourth leading contributor is correctional facilities. The chances of a Black male from the early 1930's having a chance at the three strikes law is extremely slim. For one reason it was not around until 1994, but mostly because a black male even questioned of wrongdoing was usually killed. After this law went into affect the percentage of the crime decreased severely after the first year most law officials say these results are from fear of a life in jail. After receiving the third strike you are subjected to a life in jail. (www.silicon-valley.com) In the eyes of a convicted felons family this law is unjust they believe that the sentence should be carried out according to the crime In conclusion my opinion on the three strikes law is that this law is good. If one person commits three random acts of violence, theft, fraud or whatever the case was should be thrown in jail for the rest of their life. By doing three acts they show they have no aspirations of straightening up their life.