Restorative Justice Vs Utilitarianism

An Evaluation of the Restorative Justice Model In Crime Victims: An Introduction to Victimology, Karmen (2015) outlines the restorative justice model of confronting perpetrators of criminal acts. Restorative justice is an alternative to the more traditional legal system of retributive justice; this model strives to increase communication between victim and offender and moves the focus away from offender punishment or other state-centered actions (Karmen, 2015). The restorative justice model has several benefits, including a greater level of focus on crime victims and an emphasis on making peace after a criminal event, such that an offender may reintegrate into society at large (Karmen, 2015). Restorative justice also allows for crime victims

Focus on the offenders who pose a greater threat of continuing crime. Time should be spent on higher risk offenders versus spending time trying to focus treatment on lower risk offenders. There are two types of offenders, acute and stable. An acute risk factor means they can change quickly and stable means they take longer to change. Intensive treatment for lower risk offenders can cause pro-social disruption, more violations, and can lead to anti-social activity.

This ideology could also bring up another problem that could be a direct cause of this program, and that would be a rise in crime. A huge reason for crime deterrence in our country is knowing that if you do commit a crime, you will be handled and dealt with, in a swift manner that is justified for the violence you have commited. For most people, the thought of punishment, and or death is enough to deter someone for committing a serious violent crime. If you were to add to our society the possibility of losing your life for a reason that is “justified” to our country, even though you have committed no wrongdoing, would increase the likelihood of someone commiting a crime solely because they know there is a chance in their death without any wrong doing on their

To support this reason Chapman brings up how one person can have a quick yet brutal punishment for a crime while

One of the theories it speaks of is the Pyrrhic defeat theory. This theory states that the criminal justice system is created to function in a particular fashion in order to create an image of crime where crime is actually seen as the “threat from the poor”.(Reiman, 2010, p.5) “Reimans’s theory suggests that those who have power to change the system benefit from the way it operates: they can go on committing harms and accumulating wealth without punishment, while the country remains focused on street crime and poor minority criminals. ”(Leighton 2010) In order to accomplish this “The system must actually fight crime-or at least some crime-but only enough to keep it from getting out of hand and to keep the struggle to substantially reduce or eliminate crime.

The general strain theory of crime, which was developed by criminologist Robert Agnew, would be best to explain this type of offense. Most stressors in daily life can be seen as easily solvable with money. Rather than working for financial gain, some people find it easier to commit crimes because it is a faster way to get what they want. This encompasses the reason for counterfeiting money because it involves the 3 main ingredients for the strain theory. The first aspect is the inability to achieve positively valued goals.

James Wilson and George Kelling introduced the broken windows theory in 1982. The broken windows theory states that any minor crimes, if ignored will increase into higher and more serious crimes. This theory implies that if you control an area to be well be ordered and maintained, this could stop further acts and decrease the crime rates. Broken windows theory sparked an evolutionary change in policing and the community.

The due process model reflects traditional liberal values (Packer, 1968). The crime control model focuses on controlling criminal behavior. Efficiency in the criminal justice system is paramount with regard to the crime control model. The goal is to move criminal cases through the process as quickly as possible.

The Effectiveness of Restorative Justice Proponents of restorative justice contend that it is more likely than retributive justice to reduce the incidence of crime because of its central concern for the safety of victims. The studies have demonstrated that restorative justice can have a reductive effect in certain cases and can change the behaviour of offenders. On the whole, however, there is more evidence that restorative justice is effective in reducing either the frequency or severity of reoffending for juveniles than in the case of adult offenders. Conclusion and

iii) Opportunity – Criminal’s opportunity to commit crimes. Prevention of crime can be done at this level. By removing the opportunity of criminals to conduct the crime, we can attain crime prevention. Figure 3- Crime prevention triangle (source: http://www.salinasneighborsunited.org/) 5.

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.

Plea bargains are beneficial to the prosecution because it reduces the overall costs of the criminal prosecution, devotes more time to serious cases, the administrative efficiency of the courts is greatly improved, and recourses can be devoted to cases that need greater attention. The defendant also avoids possible detention and an extended trial and may receive a reduced sentence. I believe that the defendant benefits more from a plea bargain because it would create a better outcome for them in the long run. I think we should only allow plea bargains for misdemeanors. Murders and other serious offenders should not be allowed this right to help their future.

2.Restorative justice moves from a philosophy of vengeance and retribution to one of healing, reconciliation, and forgiveness. In contrast to the traditional criminal justice that focuses on the punishment of the offender. Restorative justice focuses on victims, offenders, and the community throughout the whole process of restoring justice. As a result, restorative justice can be applied to community-based sanction or to prisoner re-entry. In addition, within the traditional criminal justice system, the state acts on behalf of victims to punish an offender, making them feel angry, unsupported, socially isolated, and distrustful of a system that was designed to protect them.

The punishment fits the crime. That statement conforms to the ideas of a system know as retributive justice. Retributive justice is rooted in proportionality. This means that a punishment should be to the same degree of ones sin. This system appeals to me personally because it avoids giving people the chance to seak revenge.

The criminal justice system does many things for our society. It provides us with a place to put criminals. It acts as a rehabilitation center for those criminals so that when they come out of jail or prison they can reintegrate into society. The criminal justice system provides us with a forum in which we can solve disputes legally which is the court system. It also acts as a deterrence for potential future offenders by putting someone in jail or prison.