Research Summary:Using panel data from 188 large cities during 1980-1999, we examined the possible homicide promoting effects of "three-strikes" laws. Results indicated that cities in states with three-strikes laws experienced short-term increases in homicide rates of 13% to 14% and longterm increases of 16% to 24% compared with cities in states without the laws.
Policy Implications:Our results emphasize the fact that rarely are the possible unintended negative consequences of policy directives considered and point to the need for policy makers to consider both intended and unintended consequences of policy directives before the directives are codified.Intuitively, most people, and lately most legislators, presume that lengthy imprisonment, determinate sentencing, mandatory minimum sentencing, and severe habitual offender laws offer safety along with retribution. But as criminologists and other social scientists have often shown, intuition alone isn't a sound basis for judging what will or won't work, at what cost, and with what side effects [emphasis added] (Skolnick, 1995:3). Facing intense public pressure to address the problem of high violent crime rates in the late 1980s and early 1990s, policy makers responded by strengthening existing laws targeting repeat offenders. Between 1993 and 1996, a total of 25 states and the federal government enacted what are * We thank Thomas Marvel1 and Francis T. Cullen for their encouragement and assistance with this project, but note that we alone bear responsibility for any errors remaining in the paper. Send correspondence to Tomislav V. Kovandzic,