That article and the effect they are suggesting aren't in contradiction to the initial justification. There are two different arguments. 1. Individuals are mor

That article and the effect they are suggesting aren't in contradiction to the initial justification. There are two different arguments. 1. Individuals are more likely to act more violently if they already have two strikes against them. This leads to a measurable statistical increase in the violence perpetrated by individuals who have two strikes against them in jurisdictions where three strikes policies exist compared to individuals who have two comparable crimes on their records in jurisdictions where there are no such policies. 2. The overall amount of violent crime in jurisdictions with three strike policies is lower than comparable jurisdictions where there are no such policies. I see no incompatibility with these premises. That is, both can be true simultaneously. In fact, the evidence provided in the article you linked seems to suggest just that.