America’s cities don’t have a crime problem. They have a repeat-offender problem.

States need to double down on “three strikes” laws.

The recent, brutal killing of Ukrainian refugee Iryna Zarutska on a Charlotte, North Carolina, light-rail train by a deranged, knife-wielding man with more than a dozen previous arrests is the wake-up call the country needs.

The tragedy has captured the attention of the nation—though not exactly the headlines of corporate media outlets—for many reasons. But to my mind, the most important aspect of this crime that can and should be addressed across the country is the problem of repeat offenders.

The suspect in the Charlotte slaying, Decarlos Brown Jr., had 14 previous arrests.

“Mecklenburg County court and jail records show Brown has been arrested in connection with 14 cases spanning more than a decade,” Newsweek reported. “His history includes convictions for felony larceny, robbery with a dangerous weapon, and communicating threats—leading to a six-year prison sentence in 2015 for incidents dating to 2013 and 2014. He was released in 2020.”

Just months after being released, according to Newsweek, “Brown was charged with assaulting his sister.”

One would think that should have been it for Brown. He was obviously a public menace who wasn’t likely to mend his ways. Yet, he was again back on the streets and in a position to cut short the life of a young woman.

It shouldn’t be this way.

The vast majority of crimes, especially violent crimes, are committed by people with a lengthy criminal record. That trend has been consistent over time.

According to a University of Chicago report cited by Manhattan Institute crime expert Rafael Mangual, of those arrested for shootings or homicide in Chicago between 2015 and 2016, “around 90 percent had at least one prior arrest, approximately 50 percent had a prior arrest for a violent crime specifically, and almost 40 percent had a prior gun arrest.”

Nonviolent crimes are also often the product of a small, prolific set of repeat offenders.

For instance, according to police numbers reported on by The New York Times, nearly one-third of all shoplifting incidents in 2022 “involved just 327 people.”

Even more outrageously, most incidents on New York City’s subways are being committed by the same people.

The New York Post reported on Monday that a “cluster of 63 career criminals” has racked up “5,000 busts between them—yet only five of them are currently behind bars.”

In many cases, these individuals are arrested and immediately back on the street due to the elimination of cash bail in New York and other cities.

Imagine for a moment how much safer and crime-free cities would be if these handful of criminals were locked away.

Activists on the left and even some—though, I believe, a dwindling number—on the right have argued that the U.S. has an overincarceration problem. But if anything, we have an underincarceration problem. More prisons need to be built, and more people who’ve proven themselves to be incapable of living in a free society need to be in them for good.

The reality is that, in America, most crimes are committed by a tiny number of people. Our high crime rates aren’t just a product of the country having lots of criminals, they are a product of injustice. The injustice is that people who have proven time and again to be a danger to the public are being released back into the general population. These lifelong criminals continue to create victim after victim, destroying the lives and freedom of countless good people, while being given second, third, fifth, or even 14 chances until they do something truly heinous and get caught.

What needs to be seriously considered throughout the country is a strengthening of the “three strikes” laws that were used in many states to crack down on crime at its height in the 1990s. The principle is that after someone commits two serious crimes, the third time they would receive a life sentence. Some of these laws, like the one passed in California in 1994, have since been watered down by courts or through legislation.

Many have argued that three-strikes laws are unfair because it could mean lengthy sentences for petty crimes, such as stealing a pizza. But it’s also clear that those who’ve been swept up by this heavy-handed sentence have already established a long track record of other crimes.

Those who continually commit “petty” crime after petty crime are typically those who engage in serious ones. Brown was reportedly a habitual fare-jumper who was basically riding on the light rail for free.

So, it’s quite clear that more aggressive laws to crack down on repeat offenders need to be passed around the country.

A ten strike law preventing people from leaving prison after that many violent crime convictions would reduce period violent crime by 20%

Five strikes would cut violent crime by 40%

Three strikes would halve violent crime

Two strikes would remove ~two-thirds of violent crime pic.twitter.com/mwaUNeQhZQ

— Crémieux (@cremieuxrecueil) September 9, 2025

The Manhattan Institute has advocated for a modified “three strikes” point system: “Creating a point-system that sets a threshold that, when reached, will trigger a mandatory minimum sentencing enhancement with the dual purpose of better deterring those beneath the threshold, and maximizing the incapacitation of those who cross it.”

The death of Zarutska needs to be a national wake-up call. Forget the dishonest press that continually insists that crime is down and that it isn’t a problem. It is. And the only way we are going to be able to stop it long term is to make sure that we aren’t just arresting criminals, but keeping them behind bars.

The post To Fight Crime Seriously, We Need a Return to ‘3 Strikes’ Laws appeared first on The Daily Signal.