The 3 strikes rule is indeed a problem, but besides that the parent still has a point. A lot of the low-value robberies involve threats or violence, where as high-value art thefts pretty much never do.

What's worse, Nuisance crime or high impact crime? Do we come down on the fellow who stole a Twix bar for the n-th time or do we lock up the guy who proved that we really need million-dollar locks and alarms for the library holdings?

To play devils advocate, part of the purpose of prison is to shield society from people who are particularly damaging to society. Repeat offenders have shown that even after being given repeated negative reenforcement, they will still carry out activities damaging to society.

I'm not sure life in prison is the answer, but it does make sense that repeated aggressions would be met with stronger negative feedback.

This seems to be a case of "The beatings will continue until morale improves."

Perhaps the crux of the issue is in the "repeated negative reenforcement" and its failure to rehabilitate a person with anti-social behavior.

To bring it back to the library, the thefts occurred over 25 years.

Second link just goes to the CT home page for me.