More handpicked essays just for you.
Essay on drinking under the influence
Essay on drinking under the influence
Essay on drinking under the influence
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Essay on drinking under the influence
The proposed theoretical framework that works best with drinking under the influence is the Reintegrative Shaming Theory. At the core of the Reintegrative Shaming Theory is the need to shame individuals engaged in criminal activities. However, the shaming has to function within the context of a criminal justice system. The theory premises that tolerance of crime is a pre-requisite for the worsening of illegal activities (Hay, 2001). Secondly, the theory connotes that stigmatization inherent to the shaming of crime is disrespectful because it tends to outcast individuals from the general community, which is a pre-requisite for further rebellion. Additionally, the best theory of re-integrative shaming is the “disapproval of an act within a continuum of respect for the offender, disapproval terminated by the ritual of forgiveness [leading to] crime prevention” (Dansie, 2011, pp. 71). The proposed Re-integrative Shaming Theoretical approach identifies that shaming (or social disapproval) creates emotional distress on the offender. The scope and extent of the shame are bound to vary because different people respond differently to shaming. However, standardization of the structured shaming may …show more content…
Apart from the apparent accident, victims may fear that the first crime will reoccur in the future. The fear, confusion, and hatred affecting accident victims, coupled with inaction by the judicial system may provoke others to also engage in drunk driving. Sometimes, the defense attorneys front a rationale that the suspect has mental issues and thus their actions cannot be counted on them because of psychological impairment (Karjalainen, Lintonen, Joukamaa, & Lillsunde, 2013). The dismissal of cases of cognitive dissonance increases the chance of the offenders repeating the action. Furthermore, even the courts know and classify these individuals as mentally ill patients in need of treatment and management of their
In Laub and Sampson’s theory of age-graded social control, they are interested in the agencies and social experiences and how they play a role in whether an individual persists or desists from offending (Laub and Sampson 2003). More specifically, Laub and Sampson (2003:38) want to answer the question, “What are the mechanisms underlying the processes of persistent offending and desistance from crime?”
But as will be discussed, there are major flaws in the Australian criminal justice system with issues focussing on three main concerns: (i) lenient sentencing in the criminal justice system particularly with white-collar and blue-collar crimes (i) recidivism and lack of support for offenders (iii) public safety concerns. This essay will examine issues with the Australian prison system, and explore the punishment of shaming and if it is an effective method in preventing general and specific deterrence using sociological frameworks and theories.
PURPOSE: To persuade my audience NOT to drink and drive Every person is accountable for his or her own “right to drink”. Failure to treat this or any “right” responsibly has consequences. The person’s “right” can and should be taken away when the failure to act responsibly endangers others.
Mental Illness has been prevalent all throughout our history from Isaac Newton to Abraham Lincoln to Sylvia Plath and so on. These illnesses can be as minor as a slight bipolar disorder or as severe as schizophrenia. In recent years, mental illnesses are becoming more prevalent in our criminal justice systems than anywhere else. Mental illness is becoming an association with crime and based on the information that has been found, this paper will attempt to further define the problem of mental illness within our criminal justice system and offer alternatives or insights as to how to possibly help with this problem.
The criminal justice system takes on a pivotal role in pursuing and preventing crimes in society. When a suspect is caught and then faced with charges for a violent crime, they legally have the right to a fair trial. In order for a criminal proceeding to successfully take place, the defendant must be fully aware of their surroundings, have a basic understanding of court procedures, as well as being capable of defending their one case. Competency to stand trial (CST) is essential for maintaining fairness in the courtroom and producing a just verdict. However, if a defendant is unable to understand legal proceedings due to mental illness or impairment, they must be thoroughly assessed and evaluated before declared incompetent to stand trial. Carrying out a case with a defendant who lacks mental capacity causes numerous issues because the individual is incapable of supplying their lawyers with information regarding their crime or any of the witness testimonies at trial. Lack of comprehensible communication between a defendant and attorney forces an ineffective defense in the case. Mental disturbances in the defendant that may cause disorderly conduct in the court room are considered disruptive and weaken the authority of the legal system. Supreme Court cases that have dealt with competency to stand trial issues over the years have made significant rulings, which have stressed the importance of identifying whether or not a defendant is in fact incompetent.
There is knocking at a door late at night, and there a policeman standing at the door with information that a family member was in an accident that involved a drunk driver. This is one of those things people hear and believe that it will not happen, but it happens every day. Every 40 minutes, someone in the U.S. is killed by a drunk driver and in 2008, in Montana, 40 percent of all traffic fatalities involved DUIs (“Drunk Driving” 1). Drunk Driving affects everyone and people in Montana should look at what other states do to find ways to make the laws tougher and more enforced.
Drunk driving has been an increasing problem for many years. One issue that contributes to this is that in the United States it is actually legal to drive with a certain alcohol percentage. The blood alcohol limit is 0.8 percent (Drunk Driving). This means that a person may drive legally as long as they have a blood alcohol percentage of 0.8 percent or under. However, even at a percentage of 0.3 there may be some impairment of alertness and concentration (Drunk Driving). Driving requires fast reflexes that may be impaired at a 0.5 percent blood alcohol level but a person with this level of intoxication is not legally drinking and driving. Many people are arrested for drunk driving. In 2009, more than 1.4 million drivers were arrested for driving while under the influence (Drunk Driving). In addition, “an average drunk driver has driven drunk 80 times before their first arrest” (Get Involved). Therefore, there were a minimum of 112 million accounts of drunk driving in 2009 alone. Drunk drivers also cause an increasing number of deaths. Drunk drivers in the United States c...
The insanity defense presents many difficult questions for the legal system. It attracts attention beyond its practical significance (it is seldom used successfully) because it goes to the heart of the concept of legal responsibility. ‘‘Not guilty by reason of insanity’’ generally requires that as a result of mental illness the defendant was unable to distinguish right from wrong at the time of the crime. The many difficult and complex questions presented by the insanity defense have led some in the legal community to hope that neuroscience might help resolve some of these problems, but that hope is not likely to be realized. (Smith 475)
Across the United States and throughout the world there is an epidemic of epic proportion involving drug addiction. Here in North Carolina the majority of the Department of Corrections inmate population is known to have substance abuse problems. (Price, 62) Along with this epidemic is the growing problem of prison overcrowding. There is a correlation between the two. Many of today’s correctional facilities house inmates that have committed drug related crimes or crimes that they committed while under the influence. There is a solution that would help society and lessen the overcrowding of the penal system. The solution is to help those that are committing crimes because of an addiction disorder. There is viable evidence that this solution works such as statistics, causes of addiction and its ability to be treated, and studies that have been done with the focus on recidivism of recovering addicts. There is also the matter of the cost effectiveness of treatment versus incarceration. Of course there are opponents that make valid argument against treatment in lieu of incarceration. The argument against includes the fact that relapse can and often does happen to the addicted individual. In many segments of society providing treatment to stigmatized individuals is frowned upon.
With incarceration costs becoming high there are new alternatives rising, one of the most popular being public shaming. Public shaming should not be considered appropriate for any offense that can result in a short jail term. Public shaming can do so much emotional damage to someone, and no one should feel such incredible humiliation or self hatred. People who endure public shaming cannot bear to live with themselves sometimes that it could lead them to do something irrational. Public shaming at times is not even a punishment for some, if someone does a crime they should also do the time. Public shaming can comes with serious consequences if given to the wrong person and if given to others it is just a slap on the wrist. Crimes should be taken seriously and so should the punishments. People should go to jail or do community service based on what they have done, they should not be let go so easily.
When society thinks about people drinking alcohol, the first assumption is that there is a drinking disorder occurring. There are thousands of ways to get help and for one to learn the correct way to drink alcohol. Society, however, doesn’t realize that there are steps and reasons alcoholism occurs within society.
This paper will view some of the characteristics and violent behavior risk factors associated with a depressed or mentally ill person. It will also, compare characteristic that characterize a person suffering form depression or a person that is mentally ill. This paper will discuss treatment or punishment debated concerning depression and mental illness in the justice system. Existing studies will be used to help in the study of depression and mental illness from different sources. Depression and Violence Depression, according to Webster (1988), is a psychotic condition marked by an inability to concentrate and feelings of dejection and quilt."(p.364) Depression is most commonly treatable with counseling, but what happens when counseling fail? Although our current mental health system is not perfect it has been able to bring us where we are today.
Mental health and the criminal justice system have long been intertwined. Analyzing and understanding the links between these two subjects demands for a person to go in to depth in the fields of criminology, sociology, psychology, and psychiatry, because there are many points of view on whether or not a person’s criminal behavior is due to their mental health. Some believe that an unstable mental state of mind can highly influence a person’s decision of committing criminal actions. Others believe that mental health and crime are not related and that linking them together is a form of discrimination because it insinuates that those in our society that suffer from poor mental health are most likely to become a criminal due to their misunderstood behavior not being considered a normality in society. In this report I will go into detail of what mental health and mental illness is, what the differentiates a normal and a mentally unstable criminal, give examples of criminal cases where the defendant’s state of mind was brought up, introduce theories surrounding why one would commit crimes due to their mental health, and lastly I will discuss how the criminal justice system has been modified to accommodate mental health issues.
The link between drug use and crime is not a new one. For more than twenty years, both the National Institute on Drug Abuse and the National Institute of Justice have funded many studies to try to better understand the connection. One such study was done in Baltimore on heroin users. This study found high rates of criminality among users during periods of active drug use, and much lower rates during periods of nonuse (Ball et al. 1983, pp.119-142). A large number of people who abuse drugs come into contact with the criminal justice system when they are sent to jail or to other correctional facilities. The criminal justice system is flooded with substance abusers. The need for expanding drug abuse treatment for this group of people was recognized in the Crime Act of 1994, which for the first time provided substantial resources for federal and state jurisdictions. In this paper, I will argue that using therapeutic communities in prisons will reduce the recidivism rates among people who have been released from prison. I am going to use the general theory of crime, which is based on self-control, to help rationalize using federal tax dollars to fund these therapeutic communities in prisons. I feel that if we teach these prisoners some self-control and alternative lifestyles that we can keep them from reentering the prisons once they get out. I am also going to describe some of today’s programs that have proven to be very effective. Gottfredson and Hirschi developed the general theory of crime.
Many people in the United States enjoy a drink of their favorite alcoholic beverage. It could be a nice ice cold beer after a hard day of work or going to the bar and enjoying a few shots or mixed drinks with friends. Drinking alcohol is a common way to mingle with friends and take the edge off a difficult day. However, there are dangers involved with alcohol since it does dampen the body’s ability to cope with new information. Alcohol becomes a poison to the body when consumed in large quantities. The biggest danger is not to the driver after they become inebriated, but comes to anyone the drunk driver comes in contact with. A sober person can be dangerous just by being distracted, but a drunk driver’s ability to cope with changing situations and distractions is one of the biggest hazards on today’s roads. Some individuals believe that they are not as impaired as what they are led to believe from government ads and the many videos that show what can happen to someone who is drinking and driving. Although, there are many policies in place to advocate against drunk driving, there are those who would endanger themselves and others with their thoughtless actions when they jump into the driver’s seat of a vehicle. Drinking and driving should never be combined because a person who has been drinking does not have the ability to use all mental faculties unimpaired, many people have been killed, injured, or psychologically hurt by a drunk driver, many men and women do not know the difference weight and gender have on the body’s ability to process alcohol, and the financial and legal trouble that is awaiting for those convicted by a DUI.