Reductivist View Of Punishment

Yes, I would agree that some people are just evil, but that is NOT the majority. That is a very, very small minority group and for that, they should serve the appropriate amount of time (Just Deserts). Rehabilitation focuses on the idea that, for the most part, criminals commit crimes due to factors outside their control. I argue that the majority of life choices made by criminals’ and noncriminals’ alike are because of these outside factors. These outside factors shape our actions in all cases and must be adjusted to help people’s process in society.

I think that the court systems should have a little more power when it comes to choosing due process or criminal control. If the person is a first time offender and it is a small crime then I think they should have the right to defend themselves. On the other hand if the person is being prosecuted for the second or more time for the same type of offense or if it was an offense that is very bad then I feel that they need to be punished for the crimes that they have committed. I do believe that there should be balance because not all court cases need to be dealt with to the extreme of punishments but then there are some cases and individuals that never seem to learn so they need to be dealt with in a different way to deter them and others from committing those same

There’s something to be said about good intentions, but good intentions don’t do anything if your actions are bad. Looking at it Teiresias’s way, it would almost be better if you did it on purpose, because then you would be halfway done with his steps. All you would have to do is “repair the evil.” But it’s not like that. In the courts, motive in a murder is a big factor in deciding your sentence.

The result of this plea was a slightly reduced sentence. 3. The judge cites his reason for sentencing as a deterrent to both the accused and the rest of society. That is to say that the judge hopes the severity of the sentence will deter Mr Austin from offending again and serve as an example of the possible punishments for a crime of this severity to the rest of the public. When deciding the sentence the judge took into account the guilty plea entered by the accused, the impact of the crime on the victim and his family, the circumstances under which the crime was committed and the criminal history of the

When a judge is considering sentencing to convict an offender specific deterrence should be more valuable than general deterrence but both are needed in the sentencing process. For the offender not to reoffend specific deterrence need to be embedded to determine the certainty of the crime. So the offender will not commit the same crime twice. Overall doing the sentencing process the judge have the right to use this offender specific deterrence to promote general deterrence to the public. This will allow other to fear the consequences and possibly punishment if they commit this specific crime.

This is certainly a conflicting issue. While it is fair to value the welfare of law abiding citizens over the welfare of convicted felons, placing restricting on felons presents the issue of those felons lacking the ability to become a contributing member of society. Like you mentioned, that can provide the push needed for them to return to crime rather than working towards a steady life of their own. Further research into the costs and benefits of such restrictions is necessary to determine whether these types of restrictions actually do benefit society overall like they intend to.

Then they are no longer considered white lies. The situation surrounding the lie being told is incredibly important to how “moral” the lie is considered. Back to the case of the murderer, is it more ethical to serve the prison sentence or is it more ethical to stay and take care of the child who has no one else. And how lying about the murder case can benefit the

Imagine what they might think for the society when they get the right to make a decision for the society. Think about the values they might have for the society if they did something wrong, that had a bad affect to the society. If they destroyed our values in the past how do we know of which values they have in mind. Is it for a good cause of the society ar a bad cause to the society? Though, criminals should have second chance in their life to change their bad habits, and be a good influence.

In this sense, advocates of rehabilitation see the opportunity to use the criminal justice system as part of a larger social welfare”(Wright, 2012, p. 1.6). Correctional professionals can use criminal theory to help them understand why certain criminals do and commit the crimes they have. With criminal theory there are many different theories as to why criminals become criminals. If correctional professionals were to take a class on understanding criminal behavior or criminal theory I honestly believe that it would help them in understanding how to help certain inmates achieve rehabilitation or self confidence. When trying to understand why people commit crimes, correctional professionals should have an understanding on how to treat and take care

The way to stop people from committing horrific acts is to not say how bad the punishment will be, but to have a more effective police force laying down the

If law enforcement fails to respond within its jurisdiction the officers and the department will be open to increased inspection and possible liability. Many people also argue that hate speeches can be just as harmful and dangerous as hate crimes. Hate speeches are not considered a hate crime, can have the same amount of psychological trauma on the victim and the community as a hate crimes. Hate speeches are only considered hate incidents, but they can also encourage bias-motivated violence(Turner and

Punishing individuals for wrongdoing is an ethical issue that is still current in modern day society. It can be argued that we need punishment for various different reasons. Without punishment, crimes would not be illegal and it would be hard to differ between what is right and what is morally wrong. Punishment highlights the need to focus on the consequences of our actions and show us what could happen if we go against the law. Punishment has the ability to make criminals better individuals through deterrence and rehabilitation.

It is very important to make good ethical decisions because one unethical decision could ruin someones career. I learned that if criminal justice professionals will just stick to their ethical guidelines then their job would be more easy to handle. I believe that if criminal justice professionals approach situations the right way instead of the way that they want to then things would run a lot smoother when professionals come across situations where they have to handle a witness, an informant, a victim, or maybe even a criminal. I also learned that if a criminal justie professional makes unethical decisions then it could turn bad for the situation at hand. It is essential that criminal justice professionals make the best ethical decisions possible because it affects everyone in the situation.

General deterrence is based on the philosophy that the general public will be deterred by the penalty, as it outweighs the benefits of crime (Sarre, 2007). Specific deterrence, focuses on the offence committed by the individual offender. It aims to deter the offender from future prohibited behavior (Clear et al., 2006). Sarre argues that it is unlikely that people choose their actions before committing a criminal offence (2007). Preventative measures are seen as more effective than punishment (Stinchcomb, 2011).

This is simply because the juvenile justice systems seems to focus more on rehabilitation rather than punishment. I understand that juveniles’ minds are not fully developed therefore that is why they may not comprehend all of theirs actions and what consequences there are for participating in criminal mischief/activity. Rehabilitation gives juveniles a chance to learn from their mistakes and actions. Although I understand and highly agree with the rehabilitation process, I think stricter/serious punishments should be completed first, and then the rehabilitation process should start. The reason I think this is because juvenile offenders may not be deterred from crime if they are not held accountable for their actions.