Preventative or Incentive

DNA Database Leads To Arrest In Gates Murder

[...] Police allege that Hawkins knew that, with his record, he would go to prison for a long time if caught again, so when he confronted Gallina--the stakes of the burglary attempt changed.

Found via "The Mouth. Dangerous when open."

I remember when the first "Three Strikes" laws were being proposed, some were concerned that criminals who already had 2 strikes against them might end up being even more violent in committing a third crime if they thought doing so would help them escape being caught.  A frequently used example was the idea of someone burglarizing a house and being confronted by the homeowner.  The concern was that the criminal, knowing that he was going to go away for life, no matter what, might be more likely to kill the homeowner so that s/he couldn't identify the burglar, thus increasing the chances f getting away with the crime.

It looks like that concern has now become a reality.  A provision in California law that requires all departing convicts who are being released on parole provide a DNA sampe that is then kept on file, which is what allowed this particular murderer to be captured.  Hopefully, other criminals - especially ones who have had to provide such a sample - will realize that they are still very likely to get caught and not go to such extremes to try and cover their tracks, but knowing that some will go ahead and kill to avoid arrest, it may become necessary to re-evaluate the usefulness of the "three strikes" rule as a way of deterring crime.