Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
AC2.2 - Discuss the Aims of Punishment - Coggle Diagram
AC2.2 - Discuss the Aims of Punishment
AIM 4 - PUBLIC PROTECTION
Definition - Involves protecting the public from offenders.
Incapacitation:
Definition - Removes the offender's physical capacity / ability to commit more crimes.
Policies:
1 - execution
2 - cutting off hands to prevent stealing
3 - chemical castration
4 - banishment
5 - travel bans
6 - curfews / electronic tagging
Imprisonment:
Definition: This is part of the claim that prison works - it takes offenders out of circulation. This has influenced sentencing laws.
Influenced:
Crime (Sentences) Act 1997 -> introduced mandatory minimum jail sentences for repeat offenders:
7 yrs min for a third class A trafficking offence
3 yrs min for a third domestic burglary conviction.
Automatic life sentence for a second serious sexual or violent offence
Criminal Justice Act (2003) -> introduced 'imprisonment for public protection'. This allowed courts to give an indeterminate sentence to a dangerous offender who is convicted of certain serious violent or sexual offences.
THEORY LINKS
BIOLOGICAL THEORIES - LOMBROSO - Argued that it is impossible to change criminals as they are biologically different to the rest of us. He supported detaining criminals rather than trying to rehabilitate them - he suggested housing them in islands away from the public. Other biological theories of criminality support chemical castration for sex offenders.
RIGHT REALISTS - A small number of persistent offenders are responsible for the majority of crimes and so long prison sentences would incapacitate them and protect the public
CRITICISMS
Incapacitation leads to longer sentences and long-term warehousing of offenders with little hope of release. This will increase the prison population and the costs that go with this.
This is a containment or risk-management strategy - it doesn't deal with the causes of crime or change offenders into law-abiding citizens.
The three strikes idea re-punished people for past mistakes
It is unjust as it punishes people for crimes the law assumes they will commit in the furtue.
AIM 1- RETRIBUTION
Definition - An expression of society's outrage at crime.
KEY IDEAS:
Proportionality - Punishment should fit the crime 'an eye for an eye' or 'life for a life' murder should be given the death penalty. This leads to a tariff system - A fixed scale of compulsory penalties for different offences.
Just Deserts - Offenders should suffer for breaching the moral code of society.
Expressing Moral Outrage - The effect of retribution may be to deter offenders but this is not its main aim. Its purpose is for society to express it's moral outrage. Punishment is morally good, regardless of whether it changes the offenders future behaviour. Retribution justifies the punishments for crimes already committed - not a means of preventing future crimes.
EXAMPLE : Hate Crime
If you're found guilty of a hate crime this results in an 'uplift' or higher tariff sentence of 2 yrs this reflects the moral outrage felt by society. EG grievous Bodily Harm (GBH) carries a max sentence of 5 years imprisonment but this can be increased to 7 ears if it was racially motivated.
THEORY LINKS
RIGHT REALISM - Retribution assumes that offenders are rational actors - they made a conscious choice to commit crime. They are responsible for their actions. Punishment is justified because they made an active choice to break a moral code.
FUNCTIONALISM - DURKHEIM - The moral outrage expressed through retribution performs the function of boundary maintenance. It reminds people of whats right and wrong
CRITICISMS
It can be argued that offenders deserve forgiveness
If there is a fixed tariff on penalties, discretion cannot be used.
There will be disagreement on which crimes are seen as more serious than others.
AIM 2 - REHABILITATION
Definition- Making offenders change their behaviour
KEY IDEAS:
Positive Change - Punishment will help to change offenders so that they can go on and live a crime free life.
Treatment - This doesn't punish past offences but uses a variety of treatment programmes to change the future behaviours of the offender.
Causes - This addresses the issues that led to their offending,
THEORY LINKS:
INDIVIDUALISTIC THEORIES - They see rehabilitation as the main aim of punishment. Ways of changing behaviour include:
1) Cognitive Theories - CBT- teaches offenders to correct their thinking errors and biases that may have led them to crime
2) Eysenck's Personality Theory - favours the use of aversion therapy to deter offending behaviour
3) Skinner's Operant Learning Theory - Supports the use of token economies to encourage offenders in prison to reward more acceptable behaviour
LEFT REALISM - favours rehab as it may present an opportunity to address the social causes of crime. They believe the causes of crime are connected to poverty, unemployment and a lack of educational opportunity. If offenders can be given skills and training their needs will be met and will be less likely to offend.
REHAB POLICIES
1) Education and Training Programmes - this will improve employability - give them new skills to be able to earn an 'honest living' on release.
2) Anger management Courses - Used with violent offenders - Aggression Replacement Training and other CBT's may be used here. Offenders will learn to manage their anger.
3) Drug Treatment and Testing Orders - these are programmes used to deal with drug dependence. Addiction may often be connected to reasons for offending. Community sentences may also include a requirement to enroll on these programmes.
4) Support - There will be a lot of input of resources and professional support from therapists, probation officers an organisations to achieve change.
CRITICISMS
RIGHT REALIST- Argues that rehab has limited success. Reoffending rates are high despite prisoners completing these programmes.
MARXISTS - These programmes shift the blame onto the offender and their failings. The real cause of crime is capitalism. There is a fixed tariff of penalties and discretion cannot be used.
AIM 3 - DETERRENCE
Definition - discourages future offending
KEY IDEAS
To deter someone from doing something is to put them off doing it. The fear of being caught and punished could deter people from committing. Deterrence can be individual or general.
Individual Deterrence - This uses punishment to deter an individual from reoffending. Punishment may convince the offender that it's not worth repeating the experience.
EXAMPLE - Margret Thatcher's 'short, sharp, shock' juvenile detention centres in the 80's were believed to work because they were so tough - young offenders would leave not wanting to return.
General Deterrence - This deters society in general from breaking the law. Punishment teaches everyone a lesson: if the public sees how an offender is punished they will see what they will suffer if they were to commit. In the past, in the UK, This was one through public executions. Today the media informs us about the costs of offending.
General Deterrence Severity vs Certainty - It is important to distinguish between the severity of punishment and the certainty of punishment. A severe punishment will only be a successful deterrent where the offender is likely to be caught. A mild punishment may be more effective where the offenders have a greater chance of being caught. EG the mandatory minimum sentence for a 3rd burglary is 3 yrs in prison but only 5% of reported burglaries result in a conviction so this would not deter a burglar.
THEORY LINKS
RIGHT REALISM
Rational Choice Theory - this sees individuals as rational actors who weigh up the costs and benefits of committing a crime. Severe punishments increase costs and so will deter offenders.
Situational Crime Prevention - Target hardening eg locks on doors makes it more difficult for the offender and so they would abandon the target.
INDIVIDUALISTIC THEORY: SOCIAL LEARNING THEORY - This explains general deterrence. If a potential offender sees a model being punished for an offence they are less likely to imitate this behaviour.
CRITICISM
short, sharp, shock wasn't very successful
Prison isn't a very effective deterrent - Around 50% of prisoners reoffend within a year of release.
How do we decide how severe a punishment needs to be for it to deter enough potential offenders?
It assumes potential offenders are aware of the risks but this may not be the case.
It ignores acts that are irrational - driven by emotion
People also follow the law because they feel it is the right thing to do not.
AIM 5 - REPARATION
Definition - makes good the harm caused by crime
key idea = Involves the offender making amends for the wrong they have done. This harm can be material or social. The victim may be an individual, society as a whole or both.
EXAMPLES:
Financial Compensation - Given to the victim. EG paying costs to repair damage. Courts can impose compensation orders on offenders.
Unpaid Work - Reparation to society. EG Community Payback - Removing graffiti. Imposed as part of a community order.
Restorative Justice - This makes amends for social damage. The offender has to recognise the impact of their actions by facing their victims alongside a mediator. This allows the victim a voice and a means of seeking closure in explaining the impact the crime has had on them. The offender will be able to express their remorse and seek forgiveness. This can help reintegrate the offender back into society.
THEORY LINKS
LABELLING - As this allows offenders to show remorse it aslo allows reintegration and prevents them being pushes into secondary deviance.
FUNCTIONALISM: DURKHEIM - The ability to restore things to the way they were before the crime is essential for complex modern societies to function well.
CRITICISMS:
This may not work with all types of offences / offenders - best for minor offences. Harder to see this working for families of murder or sex offence victims.
Some regard reparation as being too soft on the offender