Shaw believes that a Utilitarian perspective supports the foundations of criminal law because laws help people have a sound mind and a good life. This is because laws protect personal belongings and self. Shaw suggests criminal law should be viewed from a Utilitarian perspective since it helps the overall well-being of society. Some things are breaking the law but are not to be punished as harshly as others. For example, a person speeding over the posted speed limit would not need to be sent to prison like a person who murders someone.
The document “Crime and Punishment in the Elizabethan Era” also points out that the law was flexible and could be applied differently based on the situation. When a person was convicted of treason, they were not always executed immediately. Some were inhumanely tortured for more information to see if they were working with others, despite the obvious lack of morality in doing this, it worked. However, on the other hand, the Elizabethan Law did have at least some moral sense to it as people some were spared from torture, and even execution in certain circumstances. When pregnant women were sentenced to death they could be spared for their the lives of their unborn children.
But most will not rehabilitate and will continue their life of crime if they are granted this. The age of a person should not be a factor, the unknowingness of their actions of what is right and wrong will always be present when they commit a crime, and the “underdeveloped brain” argument is also not very true. Teens that commit heinous crimes such as murder, rape, and other similar crimes should be sentenced to life in prison. But with the possibility of parole should be present, and for the most heinous crimes. It is not likely that parole would be given.
Juveniles Justice Juveniles who are criminals being sentenced to life without parole can be shocking to some people. I believe if a juvenile is able to commit a crime, then they are able to do the time. The article “Startling finds on Teenage Brains” talks about how the brain can be different from the time you are teens to the time you are an adult. After, considering both sides on juvenile justice it is clear that juveniles should face life without parole because they did the crime so they can do the time. Also I believe the juvenile’s age should not influence the sentence and the punishment give.
In allocation models there needs to be taken into consideration other aspects of crime, such as behavioral and physical characteristics of communities so that there can be a more appropriate understanding of the crime itself and find ways of how to prevent criminals from doing the crime in lieu of just hoping that there will be an officer nearby that can get to crime scene on time to halt the crime or hoping to discourage criminals by making them believe that police is omnipotent (Kennedy, Caplan & Piza, 2011, pg. 340). Another disadvantage of crime prevention model is that its calculations are based off assumption that crime occurs randomly, which will make the results inaccurate (Fritsch et al., 2009, pg. 35). One of the advantages of the crime prevention allocation model is that it can at least provide police administrators with an idea of where crime is being concentrated, however there is no evidence that concentration of crime will necessarily lead to more crime; it just means that crime will most likely happen there but it might also not happen at that location at all and happen somewhere else (Kennedy, Caplan & Piza, 2011, pg. 341). Another advantage of the crime prevention allocation model is that it has helped paved the road for more precise allocation models such as the Allocation of Patrol Personnel (MAPP) that is being employ by many police departments today (Fritsch et al., 2009, pg. 40). Because policing is a dynamic system I do not think that the crime prevention allocation model can work in a modern city, however I think that it can help supplement other things that police departments are already doing in order to prevent crime, moreover I believe that it is better to use the crime prevention allocation model as an alternative to doing allocation by
Others, will play the victim by arguing that they felt their life was in danger and committed the crime out of self defense. Juveniles also argue, that they are unaware of the consequences of their actions. Whatever the reasons for a juvenile committing a heinous crime, they are still responsible. Age and immaturity should not be reason why a juvenile should not be sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole. I believe that juveniles should be held responsible for their action and thus, be sentenced to life in prison.
“juvenile offenders cannot with reliability be classified among the worst offenders”: they are less mature, more vulnerable to peer pressure, cannot escape from dangerous environments, and their characters are still in formation (Juveniles Don’t Deserve Life Sentences). I understand why juveniles are less mature and not as aware as adults, but they should know the difference between right and wrong. If a juvenile is of the age 10 and up, than they should have the mindset to know what the right and wrong thing to do is. When a juvenile engages in an atrocious crime they should know why they did. Juveniles that commit heinous crimes, such as murder, should be sentenced to life in prison because their mind is developed enough to where they are conscious of what they are performing.
(Garinger, paragraph 6). This quote proves that juveniles are different and can change their way. They can choose to no longer be seen as a threat but as another normal juvenile. As I said in the beginning, juveniles do not deserve life sentences, they are biologically different from adults and can change with the right help.
If nobody puts a stop to the teenagers that are committing crimes than more and more teenagers are going to start committing crimes. When a teen doesnt get big punishment they believe it's okay to continue doing what they're doing. If you don't correct or point out they are doing something wrong then they will never fix it. Imagine living in a world with not so many teens committing crimes. It will be a better world to live in not only for the teens but also for the smaller kids they will have better role models.
This is when your most mature and know the meaning and value of life. Now, that’s no reason a seventeen year old or fourteen year old should commit a crime due to maturity of the brain, but its logical. Kid or even teenager brains may not have self control and desirable behaviors (“Young Offenders…”). Kids do before they think, which explains why a lot of them apologize after the fact. In reality it’s too late, but to a kid they believe they should be forgave.
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
They will think, “oh probation is not that bad” and will not fear the consequences when it comes to committing more criminal mischief/activity. I understand we should give juveniles a second chance, however if we are too easy on them the first go around they will not learn from their mistakes. This is why I firmly believe stricter/serious punishments would be more effective in the juvenile justice system if put into play
Chapter VII talks about Glenn Walters’s “Lifestyle Theory”. The lifestyle theory generally explains that criminal behavior is part of the patterns of human life and choice. Criminal behavior is all perceived through their morally, corrupted mind. Chapter X talks about Robert Agnew’s “Super Traits Theory or General Theory”. The super traits theory generally explains five life provinces that is possibly the cause for crime.