Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Restorative justice as a deterrent
Restorative justice as a deterrent
Concepts with restorative justice
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Restorative justice as a deterrent
How would a conservative reply to a proposal for restorative justice? How would a restorative justice advocate respond to a conservative proposal for more prisons? Restorative justice is defined as “using humanistic, no punitive strategies to right wrongs and restore social harmony” (Siegel, 2008, p. 189). Instead of imposing harsh penalties on offenders like long prison sentences or even the death penalty, restorative justice calls for a more rehabilitative approach, such as reconciliation and offender assistance. Even though restorative justice has many supporters, it also boasts numerous opponents as well. In response to a proposal for restorative justice, conservatives largely contest the idea in favor of a more “get-tough” on criminals approach. “According to conservative theory, human beings are obliged to curb their drive for self-gratification. Offenders are to be punished harshly in order to provide them with a moral lesson and to serve as a general deterrent” (Mantle, Fox, & Dhami, 2005, p. 20). Many citizens worry that with the advancement of restorative justice comes the loss of state and government power. Because formal court processes are usually avoided and communities execute their own “judge and jury” practices when a crime is committed, restorative justice is sometimes seen as a threat to traditional U.S. state and federal court systems. A reduction in the involvement of the American court systems is viewed as a “breakdown of traditional social and legal authority” (Mantle et al., 2005, p. 20). With “a culture that is becoming increasingly conservative and focused on security rather than personal freedom,” (Siegel, 2008, p. 194) many conservatives are resistant to a form of justice that gives more liberty an... ... middle of paper ... ...r person in authority” (Mantle et al., 2005, p. 7). Native Americans are also historically known for using the “sentencing circle “where villagers could discuss an offender’s crime with him or her and jointly decide on a rehabilitative measure. Restorative justice has many opponents and advocates. Whether or not this approach to criminal justice will gain a stronger foothold in our society is yet to be determined, but restorative justice is not likely to disappear anytime soon. Erin C. Young Bibliography Greg Mantle, F. D., & Dhami, M. K. (2005). Restorative justice and three individual theories of crime. Internet Journal of Criminology IJC , 1-36. Retrieved from http://www.restorativejustice.org/articlesdb/articles/5914 Siegel, L. J. (2008). Critical criminology: It's a class thing. Criminology: The core (pp. 173-196). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing.
Throughout this paper, criticisms and praises will be mentioned in the borrowing of these ingenious practices, along with arriving to a conclusion of whether we are ready to deal with offenders in the restorative justice aspect. This is an important issue because, with a newly arrived program, we need to realize whether or not we are rushing into something that the criminal justice system is not ready for and also whether they are effective.
Question 1. Both Thomas Mathiesen and Stanley Cohen argue that alternative criminal justice responses that were presented after the 1970s were not real alternatives (Tabibi, 2015a). The ‘alternatives’ which are being questioned are community justice alternatives generally, and Restorative Justice specifically. The argument here is that Restorative Justice cannot be a real alternative because it is itself finished and is based on the premises of the old system (Mathiesen, 1974). Moreover, Restorative Justice is not an alternative, as it has not solved the issues surrounding the penal system (Tabibi, 2015a). Cohen (1985) supports this sentiment, and suggests that community based punishment alternatives have actually led to a widening and expansion
White, R. & Haynes, F. (1996) Crime and Criminology: an introduction. Oxford University Press UK.
Crnovich, M. 2005. Report on sentencing circles in Nunavik. In Pautuutit Women’s Association, Inuit Women and Justice: Progress Report, 4(8), pp. 8-11
...hrough a long and complicated process of development. The goal of community service has not always been clear. However, due to increasing in the prison population, community-based corrections is now seen as a good alternative to incarceration due to its rehabilitative nature and cost savings. Communities also support non-incarceration measures for offenders who commit minor offenses. Community-based sanctions are more humane and even more effective in reducing the problem of recidivism. The biggest problem to reforming the system is the perception that offenders are inherently bad, and they cannot be reformed. Evidence from research suggests that rehabilitative programs aimed at restorative justice as opposed to retributive justice are good for all the parties. Importantly, it addresses the criminal tendencies that led to the commission of crime in the first place.
The purpose of this paper is to examine the processes of both Restorative and Retributive justice through the case of Sara Kruzan vs. The State of California. First we will establish the principle philosophers associated with each type of justice and those system's theoretical applications in our criminal justice system. Then we will apply both systems to Sara Kruzan's trail and determine the publishable outcomes. Finally we will review Sara's Life after her trial and speculate on what system would have produced a more just outcome.
Pollock, J. M. (2012). Crime & justice in America: An introduction to criminal justice (2nd ed.). Waltham, MA, USA: Anderson Publishing (Elsevier).
The Criminal Justice system was established to achieve justice. Incarceration and rehabilitation are two operations our government practices to achieve justice over criminal behavior. Incarceration is the punishment for infraction of the law and in result being confined in prison. It is more popular than rehabilitation because it associates with a desire for retribution. However, retribution is different than punishment. Rehabilitation, on the other hand is the act of restoring the destruction caused by a crime rather than simply punishing offenders. This may be the least popular out of the two and seen as “soft on crime” however it is the only way to heal ruptured communities and obtain justice instead of punishing and dispatching criminals
In the last four decades, the number of incarcerated Americans has increased 700 percent to 2.3 million in 2010 (McGarry et al., 2013). The incarceration rates are also high and increasing in several other countries, including Australia, the United Kingdom and Germany. The number of repeat offenders are a large proportion of the prisoners. For example, it is indicated by Mastrobuoni & Terlizzese (2014) that nearly 40 percent of released offenders are re-incarcerated within three years in the United States. Thus, if countries could balance the implement of incarceration and rehabilitation to reduce recidivism, it will bring enormous societal benefits and the decrease in imprisonment rates. In the essay, I will discuss the effectiveness of
Restorative justice is an alternative community based program for juvenile offenders. Instead of sending juvenile offenders to jail or punishing them, they are taught
As the purpose of restorative justice is to mend the very relationship between the victim, offender, and society, communities that embrace restorative justice foster an awareness on how the act has harmed others. Braithwaite (1989) notes that by rejecting only the criminal act and not the offender, restorative justice allows for a closer empathetic relationship between the offender, victims, and community. By acknowledging the intrinsic worth of the offender and their ability to contribute back to the community, restorative justice shows how all individuals are capable of being useful despite criminal acts previous. This encourages offenders to safely reintegrate into society, as they are encouraged to rejoin and find rapport with the community through their emotions and
Agreeing on a definition of restorative justice has proved difficult. One definition is a theory of justice that focuses mostly on repairing the harm caused by criminal behaviour. The reparation is done through a cooperative process that includes all the stakeholders. Restorative justice can also be explained as an approach of justice that aims to satisfy the needs of the victims and offenders, as well as the entire community. The most broadly accepted definition for restorative justice, however, is a process whereby all the parties that have a stake in a specific offence collectively resolve on how to deal with the aftermath. This process is largely focused around reparation, reintegration and participation of victims. That is to say, it is a victim-centred approach to criminal justice, and it perceives crime differently than the adversarial system of justice.
...apabilities to deal with this which is not the case so much nowadays as Tony Marshall (1999) argues. There are criticisms over procedures, loss of rights such as an independent and impartial forum as well as the principle of proportionality in sentencing. There is also an unrealistic expectation that restorative justice can produce major changes in deviant behaviour, as there is not enough evidence to support this claim (Cunneen, 2007). Levrant et al (1999) on the other hand suggests that restorative justice still remains unproven in its’ effectiveness to stop reoffending and argues that its appeal lies in its apparent morality and humanistic sentiments rather than its empirical effectiveness. He continues to argue that it allows people to feel better within themselves through having the moral high ground rather than focusing on providing justice to the offender.
“Restorative justice is an approach to crime and other wrongdoings that focuses on repairing harm and encouraging responsibility and involvement of the parties impacted by the wrong.” This quote comes from a leading restorative justice scholar named Howard Zehr. The process of restorative justice necessitates a shift in responsibility for addressing crime. In a restorative justice process, the citizens who have been affected by a crime must take an active role in addressing that crime. Although law professionals may have secondary roles in facilitating the restorative justice process, it is the citizens who must take up the majority of the responsibility in healing the pains caused by crime. Restorative justice is a very broad subject and has many other topics inside of it. The main goal of the restorative justice system is to focus on the needs of the victims, the offenders, and the community, and focus
Johnstone, G. and Ness, D. (2007) Handbook of Restorative Justice. USA: Willan Publishing. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/the-big-question-what-are-the-alternatives-to-prison-and-do-they-work-419388.html [Accessed 01 January 2014].