Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
theories of punishment - Coggle Diagram
theories of punishment
-
retributivist view: set liability and punishment proportionate to the extent of the wrongdoing and the offender’s blameworthiness (this view doesn’t consider prior bad acts because trying to be proportional for the single act that is in question)
crime-control utilitarian view: sees the value of liability and punishment as residing in the future crime that the punishment can help to avoid (what can be done to produce a good outcome for society- how can we reduce crime?), uses punishment as deterrence- stop others from doing similar crime (this approach considers prior bad acts- have to consider this to stop that person from future acts)
- along with punishment, modern crime utilitarians include rehabilitation of the offender, general deterrence of others, or incapacitation of others as way to control crime
- rehabilitation: if we rehabilitate the offender then he won’t commit another crime because created a moral person by teaching them the harm of the crime or by teaching them a skill
- incapacitation: if we take that criminal off the streets then won’t commit crimes because they are in prison, can commit in the prison but can not commit in the public and keeps the public safe from that offender
- nose thumbing: showing open contempt for society’s norms by committing another offense after already having been convicted and punished for it (example: Moran- the serial petty thief)
habitual offender statutes: increase the punishment exponentially when there is a prior criminal record | this is done as a better way to control crime
- downside of this method: deviate from idea of justice being proportionality between blameworthiness and punishment
- three strikes statutes: provides automatic life imprisonment for anyone who commits a third felony offense (this is crime-control that focuses on future offenses, instead of what offenders deserves)
-
- majority of states use the three strike method, but there has been shift away from it, with states that do use it look at the types of offense that were done, needing the offenses to include violent acts
types of deterrence
- general deterrence: aims to deter other potential offenders
- special deterrence: deter the offender at hand from committing crime in the future
-
proportionality principle: this is in place to make sure the maximum sentence is not always given, if the offender was given the maximum every time then can’t deter future crime by the offender because already given the maximum and can’t threaten with it
- have to find balance: make sure the punishment is enough to deter but not too much because then burdensome on the state
- if not proportional and always give maximum then it encourages criminals to go all out (example: if you’re going to get death sentence for stealing candy then the criminal might as well go all out and steal a car instead of the candy bar)
-
Deontological desert: alternative to utilitarian distributive principles is retribution or “just desert” | sole criterion is the moral blameworthiness of the offender- Fina, who wanted to kill the mother for personal gain would be more moral blameworthy than Devon who did it to end the mother’s suffering