I know you're proving something here, but I'm not sure what. The first example they cite is a man who was convicted for multiple robberies (robbery is a violent

I know you're proving something here, but I'm not sure what. The first example they cite is a man who was convicted for multiple robberies (robbery is a violent crime, by the way), and even after a string of prison stints, he goes and shoplifts. What is he thinking? What in the world is he doing to his life!?!?!? As is typical of this kind of slant, all agency is removed from him. He is not responsible for going to prison, society is. I understand what the arguments are, and I agree with the length of sentences ... to a point, but I'm always frustrated that victims are ignored in these arguments and the focus is always on the rights of the abuser. The context for 'three-strike' type of policy is the high level of crime in America and an attempt to protect and provide justice to law-abiding citizens who are victimized by these individuals.