«The Strike Three Law»

As with all new ideas, what would later be called the “The Tier III Male Offender Accountability Act”, or popularly “The strike three law”, was meet with laughter and ridiculed at first. Stripping a three-time male offender naked, legally forbidding him the wear clothes at all, and then forcing him into chastity seemed just stupid and crazy at first. But as the crime rates rose and high end upper-middle class areas was plagued with burglaries and violent armed robberies, the idea slowly started to gain traction outside of the hard-on-crime populist right. So, when “The Tier III Male Offender Accountability Act” passed into law fifteen years ago it was with wide bi-partisan support, even among the moderate center-left parties, and the only opposition was on the far liberal left. The reasoning behind the law was that a third offence showed a pattern of willful disregard for ethical and legal responsibility, and to enforce the convict into a lifestyle of subordination, by putting him on public naked display and taking away his sexual privileges, would serve as a form of civil re-education and break his pattern of repeated offence. There were some voices who wanted to include the female population in the law but given that the majority of repeated offenders were male, and that studies showed that **** nudity and chastity would have best effect on males, this discussion quickly died away.

As for the majority of the population, I had been on the same journey, from mild skepticism to stanch supporter. At the time the “The Tier III Male Offender Accountability Act”, I had just turned thirty, my career in the corporate world had begun to accelerate and I had just landed a middle management position in a renowned software company, and as a white law-abiding male, I never thought that this law would ever affect me personally. Of course, as a gay man, the prospect of having naked men running around in public certainly played in on my support.

The first version of “The Tier III Male Offender Accountability Act” put a high bar on when to strip a man of his clothing and sexual privileges. The law only applied to males 18 years or older, sentenced the third time for a crime with a minimum sentence of six months in prison. The third time offender would then spend the entire prison sentence, and then an additional one to three months after release, naked and in chastity, legally forbidden from wearing clothes and touching his own cock. No clothes, other than footwear below the ankles, could be worn at any time. The offenders were not even allowed to be in possession of any clothing and would have all the clothes they owned at the time of their sentence confiscated and given to charity. The only thing you were allowed to wear as a third time offender, besides footwear, was the mandatory steal chastity belt. With the belt fitted around your waist, the tight ring round the base of your cock and balls, and your cock itself sealed off in a tight metal tube, an erection would be unpleasant and nearly be impossible and so would release by touching yourself or penetrating anything. The belt would only come off during scheduled mandatory cleaning sessions, and as a reward for good behavior the convict could be allowed to cum, in his cage and through anal stimulation, in such cleaning sessions. When the sentence was finally served, and the convict was back in clothes and out the chastity belt, he would have to watch his steps. Any new convictions would leave him naked and chaste for life.

With the six months prison sentence threshold, and the fact that the “The Tier III Male Offender Accountability Act” only applied to convictions after the law went into effect, it took nearly two and a half years before the first nudity and chastity sentence were handed out, and about three years before the first naked man wearing nothing but a chastity belt was seen in public. My first encounter with a naked convict was with my neighbor Dave, who suddenly popped out of the elevator wearing nothing but an allover blush and the chastity belt on his dick. Dave was a nerdy, skinny, and shy type who I barely had seen outside. I didn’t even know he had done prison time, but apparently, he had been involved in some dodgy business from his apartment that had given him three rapid six months prison sentenced. Now he was serving his additional two months naked and chastity time after release from prison. When a naked convict was been released from prison to serve the last of their sentence in public, he was also given a sort of inverted curfew making it illegal for him to be inside for more than 12 hours a day. This regulation was amended to the law to prevent a naked and chaste convict to just wait out his public nudity time inside. If the convict didn’t have a regular job, he would be enrolled into government programs that would keep him outside for his mandatory 12 hours a day. For the next two months I saw naked Dave picking trash around town. Always with a hansom allover blush, and, as for most of the naked convicts, with a string of precum hanging out of his chastity cage as visible evidence of his lack of sexual release.

When “The Tier III Male Offender Accountability Act” had been in effect for ten years, all evidence showed it had been a success. Since the first naked chastity sentence had been given the number third time convicts had leveled out and then slowly dropped. Also, even if there had been a considerable number of forth time convicts receiving a lifetime naked chastity sentence, the number of forth time convicts had seen a significant drop compared to the last years before the “The Tier III Male Offender Accountability Act”. All this pointed to the law having the preventive effect as hoped. Also, there were reports of a change in the dynamic inside prisons that was seen as a positive side effect. Before the “The Tier III Male Offender Accountability Act” it was the repeated offenders, the ones who had served several long sentences, who ruled the prisons. This was not longer the case, when these inmates found themselves stark naked and wearing a chastity belt. Suddenly, they were on the rock bottom in the hierarchy and no longer served as idols and someone to look up to for younger first-time offenders.

But there were also some worrying signs of loopholes in the law. Since the threshold for receiving a naked chastity sentence was three prison sentences of more than six months, you could dodge the nudity bullet by keeping your prison sentence below six months. Criminal lawyer quickly specialized in having their clients’ indictments altered to keep them safe from a naked chastity sentence. And since “The Tier III Male Offender Accountability Act” went into effect, the number of shorter prison sentences had increased. Then there were, juvenile crimes. This was exempted from the “The Tier III Male Offender Accountability Act” and did not count on your way to a nudity conviction. Even if many of the young criminals sooner or later ended up naked and in chastity, the juvenile crime rate had not changed after the law, and it had clearly not had a preventive effect on the young male population. The same was with petty crimes that was not punished with imprisonment. The rates on these crimes were also unaffected by the “The Tier III Male Offender Accountability Act”.

So, at the tenth anniversary of “The Tier III Male Offender Accountability Act” it was a growing consensus among the political parties that the “Strike three law” should be tightened and the loopholes closed, so that the preventive effect from the threat of a **** nudity and chastity punishment could be maxed out. Such changes to the law also had broad public support, and eventually, three years ago a revised and restricted version of the “The Tier III Male Offender Accountability Act” was passed into law. This new law put the threshold for a naked chastity punishment so low, that if a man didn’t watch his step carefully, he risked stumbling into **** nudity and chastity before he knew it. Something I would come to experience firsthand myself.