Utilitarian Approach To Punishment

I am going to write an essay on the retributivist approach and reductivist approach on punishment, comparing and contrasting both theories. To start off I will talk about the retributivism theory and the belief that an offender should be punished based upon the severity of the offense. I will them move onto just deserts which Is a modern retributivist theory which only focuses on crimes that have already committed making sure individuals get there just deserts for doing wrong. Next I will write about the reductivist theory which is all about trying to deter individuals from committing a crime or reoffending. Jeremy Bentham had a huge impact on reductivism believing if pain was to outweigh pleasure then it would deter individuals and overall nobody would have the desire to commit a crime as they are aware of the consequences they would have to face. Moving on to deterrence will talk about the two different types of deterrence; individual and general deterrence. Individual deterrence focuses on stopping individuals from reoffending whereas general deterrence is about deterring individuals who have never even committed an offence from turning to crime. Once writing about both retributivism and reductivism I will start to compare and contrast both theories, looking at the similarities and differences. Finally I will give my own opinion on the theories and which theory I believe is best, talking about how retributivist and reductivist punishments are different and the good and

One of the oldest justifications for punishment involves the principles of retribution. Retribution (1900-1905) refers to an idea that offenders should be punished for committing a crime, but would not punish someone who was forced to commit a cri-me, i.e. duress. It can be sometimes be viewed as a

Incapacitation, the removal of the offender from society to prevent them from harming society further, has been in use since ancient times. The incapacitation may be in the form of exile, penal colonies, prison, or placement in a mental institution. Regardless of the form, incapacitation places its focus on the future behavior of the offender and on the characteristics of the offender. It assumes that since that majority of crime is committed by a small number of criminals, removing them from society will reduce crime. What this theory does not take in to

There are four main philosophies of punishment, which differ as follows: Retribution – a very antiquated model representing the idea of “an eye for an eye”, in which offenders “get what they deserve” and their penalties fit the crime they have committed. Variations of this model do take into consideration the circumstances and characteristics of the offender in addition to the morality of the crime. This is a very unforgiving form of punishment, and not heavily exercised since it comes from a place of malice and does nothing to improve the lives of the victims, the criminal, or the community as a whole. Incarceration – creating physical restraints that prevent an individual from being able to perform certain actions. Examples of this include

Sorry for the late response Dr. Brightman. However, there are several different punishment philosophies that are used throughout the world. One form of punishment is retribution where the offender is required to pay back society for the crime he or she had committed. Another form of punishment is rehabilitation where the offender is put through a program, such as a medical, psychological or educational one, to transform the offender into a law-abiding person. Also used is deterrence where the offender should come to the conclusion that the crime is not worth the risk of the resulting punishment. Also incapacitation is used where the offender is denied the opportunity to commit further crimes, usually through prison or exile. And of course

What is Utilitarianism? The Criminal justice system addresses the Utilitarianism method, because the method plays a major role in society it is a normative ethical theory that spaces the locus of right and wrong uniquely on the consequences of electing one action or policy over other actions or policies within the criminal justice system that can handle a complete department or community. As such, it changes outside the latitude of one's individual welfares and takes into justification the goods of others in the public within a law enforcement stand point. The Utilitarian theory was created from John Stuart Mill accustomed the more self-indulgent propensities in Bentham's philosophy by stressing that it is not the amount of pleasure or satisfaction,

one has consequences at least as good as or better than any of the other options

The Different Aims of Sentencing There are a number of reasons why a society punishes offenders. These include, among others, to discourage the offender from committing further crimes (individual deterrence), to help the offender, so that he or she won’t offend again (rehabilitation), to prevent the offender from committing further crimes through imprisonment (incapacitation) and to show society’s disapproval of the crime (denunciation). Retribution is to punish on the premise that it is a payback for the offence (Retribution carries with it the notion of “Do the crime, do the time”) Reparation is aimed at compensating the victim of the crime usually by ordering the offender to pay order to

Sentencing is the imposition of a criminal sanction by a sentencing authority , such as a judge. Schmallger & Smykla, 2009, pg# 71) There are seven goals of sentencing including revenge, retribution, just deserts, deterrence, incapacitation, rehabilitation and restoration. Revenge refers to a retaliation to some kind of assault and injury. Revenge can be a type of punishment for the criminal justice system. The jury, sometimes, basis there choices on emotions, facts and evidence. It is considered revenge in some cases because the victim's looks at it that way when they feel justice has been served. Retribution is a type of sentencing involving another form of retaliation. Retribution means "paying back" the offender for what he or she has

These criminal sentences fall between probation and incarceration. There are different ways of punishing people for committing a crime. Sanction are more like fines, community service, probation, electronic monitoring, imprisonment, and so many others. The severity of some sentences is not always easy to determine. It is very difficult to decide whether a certain punishment will be severe enough by an offender to stop

Does our punishment really fit the crimes? Some would not agree depending on the crime committed. Our society is and has been a more of an eye for an eye when it comes to punishment. In history most view punishment as an “eye for an eye” to make the punishment fit the crimes. Example of this is “If a builder builds a house for someone, and does not construct it properly, and the house which he built falls in and kills its owner, then that builder shall be put to death. If it kills the

SANCTIONS, PERCEPTIONS, AND CRIME: IMPLICATIONS FROM CRIMINAL DETERRENCE According to the journal article, the concept of deterrence is simple; it is the omission of a criminal act because of the fear of sanctions or punishments. Deterrence is an important foundation of the criminal justice system. Law enforcement is there to apprehend those that break the law, and to convince the public that there is a risk of apprehension and punishment if they commit a crime. Laws provide a host of different sanctions for the commission of offenses such as: fines, probation, imprisonment, mandatory minimum sentences, the “three strikes” law, and others are all enacted with the expatiation that sanction threats can deter crime is at the heart of the criminal Justice system.

The four justifications for punishment include, “retribution, deterrence, rehabilitation, and incapacitation” (Reichel, 2013, p. 231). Retribution is when a person receives a punishment as a result for committing a crime (Reichel, 2013). This form of punishment is deemed necessary by society because a person deserves to pay for breaking the law (Reichel, 2013). “A goal of retribution is to retaliate for the wrong done in such a way that the nature of the punishment reflects the nature of the offense” (Reichel, 2013, p. 231). That is why there are different sentences for different crimes because each deserves a certain punishment (Reichel, 2013). For example, a person who commits murder isn’t going to receive the same punishment as a person

The retribution punishment theory is associated with the philosopher Immanuel Kant from as far back as the eighteenth century known as the “justice model”. The concept of retributive punishment is "just deserts," used as a means of getting even with the offender, allowing the victim to feel a sense of justification by imposing the same measure of pain to the offender according to the crime committed; this will allow the victim to feel a sense of satisfaction. Though retribution is not a law of retaliation, the Mosaic laws of the Bible idealized it as “an eye for an eye” phenomenon.

Retribution, as the next aim of punishment, is associated with the idea that the wrongdoers have to be penalized and punished for violation against the civilians. Retribution could be viewed from two aspects: revenge and restoration. According to Oxford English