Deterrence's Role In Corrections

This study seeks to examine the role of retribution, deterrence, incapacitation, and the effect of punishment in corrections. Importantly, various studies have offered different positions in regards to using different measures to discourage crime. For instance, deterrence is the use of fear to discourage someone from acting against the laid norms. However, there have been sharp debates about the use of punishment as a deterrent to unwanted behaviors. The proponents believe that if punishment is administered with celerity, severity, and certainty, it can help in reducing crime. However, they maintain that it is imperative to distinguish between general deterrence and specific deterrence, where the general is where an individual is punished to act as an example to discourage the members of the public from engaging in crime. On the other hand, specific is where the specific individual is taken through the process in order to change.

In other words, they state that the perpetrators are not able to weigh the cost and benefits of such experiences. This implies that it would not squarely be considered a better remedy of combating crime. Additionally, incapacitation is applied as a means of reducing crime in the streets to protect the public. It is sought to make the offender incapacitated in order not to create a threat to the public. It may work when the offender is locked, but when free, studies show that they can still coordinate crime in their incapacitated status. Rehabilitation, on the other hand, is the use of correctional mechanisms to change an individual. This has been a better method since people have reported changed behaviors after rehabilitation. In general, all these methods are sought to discourage crime in the society, but some like rehabilitation would work better than