Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The theories of punishment in criminal law
The pros cons of punishment
The pros cons of punishment
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The theories of punishment in criminal law
Inside the Mind of Criminals and Society How does society view society view punishment when a convicted felon, or someone accused of committing a crime in the United States? The punishment that I am talking about is such as jail time, capital punishment, parole, and many other types of punishment that are given out in the United States. With this being said I will also be constructing how crimes like this has an effect on ones society. Many people are always complaining that when someone is convicted of a crime they do not feel that that person is subjected to enough time in prison. Many people believe that the punishment we are giving our criminals in the United States seems to be unfair. The reasons in which we tend to think this is because, …show more content…
The reason of doing this is so that we can send a message to society. This message is that if you commit A, your repercussion is going to be B. Such as if you go and commit murder chances are society want to give you the death penalty because, this will send a message that do not kill human beings as for it is not going to be tolerated. As a society we try to do everything with in our power to reduce crime rates with giving punishment. Yet as a society we want the harshest punishment given to those that we look down upon that are outright disgusting such as rape, pedophilia, and even murder. This conception would relate to Emile Durkheim’s theory because, we can see that by giving some type of punishment we as a society are serving as a positive function. As we serve as a positive function we are looking out for the best of what the society needs or wants. In this case the society wants to lower the crime rate in hopes that showing that their will be punishment for their actions that it will try to make the streets or environment safer. While stating this we can see that Durkheim is stating that when we give out punishment to the society we can see that the punishment is reinforcing social solidarity. We are reinforcing social solidarity by showing an example out of the one that ended up breaking the law and or even rule for this
Capital punishment, or death penalty, is one of the most controversial topics in the United States for a long time. Death penalty is when a criminal is put to death for committing crimes such as murder. Regarding this type of punishment, while there are many supporters who believe that the death penalty should be legalized throughout the nation, there is also a large number of people who against it. While Ernest van den Hagg believes that death penalty is a form of retributive justice that is needed to maintain the legal order by punishing the one who deserves to be punished, on the other hand, Hugo Adam Bedau believes that the purposes of death penalty are to be valued in term of utilitarianism, or giving positive consequences to the society.
In the article “The Penalty of Death”, written by H. L. Mencken, utilitarian principles are used to cover up for a system that wants results. All of the reasons that Mencken gives as justifications do not give concrete evidence of why the death penalty should continue as a means of punishment. The article states, “Any lesser penalty leaves them feeling that the criminal has got the better of society...” This statement alone demonstrates how he believes the death penalty brings justice and satisfaction to the people. Mencken creates the points he makes in his article in order to give society a way to make the death penalty seem less intrusive on moral principles and more of a necessary act.
Citizens are sold on the idea that criminals must be keep off the streets that the punishment must be harsh regardless of the crime, that three strikes and they are out. The justice system does not seem to focus on rehabilitation, rather in the punishment. The public constantly listens to slogans such as “protect our children”, “protect your rights”, and the public recognizes that maybe some of this laws, yet some of the harshest penalties have an ulterior motive. Can society endorse the fact that criminals should rot in jail, regardless of the crime? Think of the impact of an increased jail population on our taxes. For a moment consider the incarcerated population growing because of an increase in crime or
Proponents of capital punishment believe that killing criminals is a moral and ethical way of punishing them. They feel there is justification in taking the life of a certain criminal, when in fact that justification is nothing more than revenge. They also feel that the death penalty deters crime, although there have been no conclusive studies confirming that viewpoint (Bedau).
According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, in the year 1980 we had approximately 501,900 persons incarcerated across the United States. By the year 2000, that figure has jumped to over 2,014,000 prisoners. The current level of incarceration represents the continuation of a 25-year escalation of the nation's prison and jail population beginning in 1973. Currently the U.S. rate of 672 per 100,000 is second only to Russia, and represents a level of incarceration that is 6-10 times that of most industrialized nations. The rise in prison population in recent years is particularly remarkable given that crime rates have been falling nationally since 1992. With less crime, one might assume that fewer people would be sentenced to prison. This trend has been overridden by the increasing impact of lengthy mandatory sentencing policies.
Throughout the history of man there has always existed a sort of rule pertaining to retribution for just and unjust acts. For the just came rewards, and for the unjust came punishments. This has been a law as old as time. One philosophy about the treatment of the unjust is most controversial in modern time and throughout our history; which is is the ethical decision of a death penalty. This controversial issue of punishment by death has been going on for centuries. It dates back to as early as 399 B.C.E., to when Socrates was forced to drink hemlock for his “corruption of the youth” and “impiety”.
The murder of an innocent victim makes the public feel the need to take vengeance by executing the criminal. Indeed, being exposed to violence and the legalization of executions will ease the guilt and moral expectations that society is supposed to feel but does not. Executions have evolved into a debauched ceremony where the public can view and not endure any concern for a dehumanized criminal. Nevertheless, dehumanization of society has and will continue to prosper as culture is desensitized from executions.
Incarceration is thought of as a positive form of punishment, and negative form of punishment. The opinion varies with the type of person, and their experience from jail if they have gone. Most inmates while in prison will tell you it is a horrible place that should be gone. That would allow criminals to be free and that would let them cause harm to others or other illegal activities. Incarceration was not designed to be a paradise, it is a detention center for the bad, and meant for them to be punished. Without jails the world would be filled with even more evil, and would leave people in more danger than they already are.
While we may all want murders off the street, the problem we come to face is that capital punishment is being used for vengeance or as a deterrent. Capital punishment has been used worldwide, not only by the governments to instill fear, but to show that there are repercussions to ones actions. From the time we are born, we are taught to learn the difference between right and wrong. It is ingrained in our brains, what happens to people that do bad things? Capital punishment is renowned for being the worst thing that could be brought amongst ones life.
Emile Durkheims theory of collective consciousness is that everybody in society has common beliefs and sentiments, and to think or act differently would be a moral outrage against that. So crime is inevitable, there will always be people who think differently to others in an organic solidarity society.
Provide the justifications for punishment in modern society. Punishment functions as a form of social control and is geared towards “imposing some unwanted burden such as fines, probations, imprisonment, or even death” on a convicted person in return for the crimes they committed (Stohr, Walsh, & Hemmens, 2013, p.6). There are four main justifications for punishment and they are: retribution, deterrence, rehabilitation, and incapacitation. There is also said to be a fifth justification of reintegration as well.
The criminal justice system is the system of law enforcement that takes an extensive position in prosecuting, defending, sentencing, and punishing those who are suspected or convicted of criminal offenses. It is essential to know the many theories of punishment that the justice system has created in their minds that eventually became a part of society. This paper will analyze the theoretical explanations of punishment and their effect on society by generating an opinion of how each type of punishment deters crime the best and if punishment provides any benefit to the offenders and to society.
Durkheim sees punishment as a social institution, which is first and last a matter of morality and social solidarity. The existence of strong bonds of moral solidarity are the conditions which cause punishments to come about, and, in their turn, punishments result in the reaffirmation and strengthening of these same social bonds. (Ibid., p28) Durkheim begins his discussion of punishment with an analysis of the crimes against which punishments are used.
Punishing the unlawful, undesirable and deviant members of society is an aspect of criminal justice that has experienced a variety of transformations throughout history. Although the concept of retribution has remained a constant (the idea that the law breaker must somehow pay his/her debt to society), the methods used to enforce and achieve that retribution has changed a great deal. The growth and development of society, along with an underlying, perpetual fear of crime, are heavily linked to the use of vastly different forms of punishment that have ranged from public executions, forced labor, penal welfare and popular punitivism over the course of only a few hundred years. Crime constructs us as a society whilst society, simultaneously determines what is criminal. Since society is always changing, how we see crime and criminal behavior is changing, thus the way in which we punish those criminal behaviors changes.
Punishment has been in existence since the early colonial period and has continued throughout history as a method used to deter criminals from committing criminal acts. Philosophers believe that punishment is a necessity in today’s modern society as it is a worldwide response to crime and violence. Friedrich Nietzche’s book “Punishment and Rehabilitation” reiterates that “punishment makes us into who we are; it creates in us a sense of responsibility and the ability to take and release our social obligations” (Blue, Naden, 2001). Immanuel Kant believes that if an individual commits a crime then punishment should be inflicted upon that individual for the crime committed. Cesare Beccaria, also believes that if there is a breach of the law by individuals then that individual should be punished accordingly.