Retributive Theory Of Punishment Essay

The theory of punishment as a whole is worth investigating as well. My largest argument against the theory of punishment is that it is not a fair or just operation. The concept of punishment is a way to intentionally harm people. This is not a just way of making a case right, or making a victim heal from any crime they may have been a part of. The victim is not compensated for the damage or harm caused to them. Punishment, in the retributive theory will really only do good in that it deters people from committing crime because they are scared of the punishment- but this simply does not work as well as it should. The restitution theory does not address the issue of who is entitled to cause harm to others, or punish said criminals.

Consequentialists argue that punishing someone for their wrongdoings will ensure that they are less likely to commit this act again, but

this is not proven. In our system today, we have way too many criminals that punishment does not deter them from going through with these violent crimes. Therefore, the little bit of good that this system of punishment may do, is not equivalent to the immorality of it. In a video watched in class, we learned that making a punishment equivalent to the crime one commits is impossible in every case. If we go out of our way to cause harm on someone whom caused harm to someone else, we are brining up many other issues.
Pure restitution applies only to cases which offenders actually cause harm to someone, have actually wrongfully harmed someone, and where offender is morally responsible for causing said harm. Additionally, restitution requires that the offender restore the victim exactly to their prior rightful level of well-being. If not achievable, then as close to original position as possible. The Pure restitution theory would require the offender to do everything he is capable od doing in order to restore the well-being of his victim and additionally, the well-being of the secondary victims. The key point of restitution is to only require an offender to restore a victim to their previous rightful position of well being. Also, Do people really have a RIGHT to the satisfaction of seeing others suffer, or be punished? Restitution is advantageous in that if a victim can gather all information regarding financial loss, equivalent restitution will be ordered. Full and Partial restitution are options regarding any violent case. if an offender is not able to pay the full amount, some cases and states can reduce the amount owed, that way the offender has payment within reach rather than throwing them into something that is completely unrealistic. A way that the less wealthy can pay this debt to the victim is through prison work programs, where payments are collected through the program paychecks and such, insuring that the victim is paid. On the topic of punishment, we need a clear definition of the properties that distinguish punishment from other practices in order to assess whether or not punishment is really permissible.
One who defends the necessity argument will say that Restitution alone will not suffice and punishment is needed, for example.

Another way that some argue against pure restitution is to say that is does not have an acceptable implication that punishment does have. Pure restitution lacks implications that are backed with punishment. Additionally, it is argued that pure restitution has an unacceptable implication that punishment also shares. Some say that pure restitution is too individualistic. It is also argued that some harm is beyond repair, and restitution will not solve or make these issues better, and the theory of pure restitution allows us to do nothing at all to the offender. A very controversial issue here is the question of murder.

A pure Restitution theory will answer this argument in 3 ways: The murderer still owes a large debt as a result of the harm they caused to the victim and secondary victims, Transferability, substitutability, and pricing. Also, if there is a case with no victim, then paternalistic laws and moralistic laws. What about the very rich offenders? The restitution

theory