That's right: Liberals love criminals.

In fact, according to the liberal handbook, a liberal must have a
criminal over for dinner at least once a month. And when the crime
rate spikes, it's party time. Your editorial nailed it.

Let's get serious.

Liberals and conservatives alike want safe communities. Any
suggestions that those working to reform California's "three strikes,
you're out" law are friends of crime is rhetoric designed to skirt the
real issue: Nonviolent men and women are unjustly being locked up for
life behind this law. About 50 percent of more than 5,000 inmates
sentenced under "three strikes" law are in prison for nonserious,
nonviolent crimes.

Take the story of Sue Reams of Orange County and her son, Shane. When
Shane used drugs as a teen-ager he broke into neighbors' houses when
no one was home to support his habit.

Sue thought a little tough love was in order. She persuaded her
reluctant neighbors to press charges.

Shane did time for his burglary convictions but couldn't kick his drug
habit.

Later, Shane was convicted for acting as a lookout while a friend sold
a small amount of dope to an undercover police officer.

Strike three.

Sue, who voted for "three strikes" law, unknowingly helped prosecutors
rack up the strikes necessary to put her son away for 25 years.

She now fights to reform "three strikes" law.

Shane and many others doing time on "three strikes" convictions are
nonviolent petty criminals.

Yet, despite the discretion afforded prosecutors and judges, they are
doing the same time as cold-blooded killers.

To be fair, our criminal justice system must rise above politics and
rhetoric. For it to be legitimate, sentences must be proportionate to
the crime. The goal of "three strikes" law is to get violent, repeat
felons off our streets. "Three strikes" law must be reformed to
achieve its goal in a more just and efficient way.

Tom Hayden
State Senator
Los Angeles