Beccaria Classicism Theory

375) and by using this hedonistic calculus people will refrain from committing crimes. This concept focuses on the punishment fitting the criminal and on preventing future crimes from occurring. The three most important factors in effectively deterring a criminal from further crimes are the severity of the punishment, the certainty of the punishment, and the swiftness of the punishment. If criminal doesn’t believe he will be punished or he feels the punishment is minor in comparison to the crime or if the punishment is not swift enough, then he/she will not be deterred from committing crimes. Studies on the effectiveness of deterrence have shown to be inconclusive. The deficient areas of deterrence are crimes committed in the heat of passions, crimes committed under the influence of drugs or alcohol, and the massive backlog of cases in the nation’s courts (Neubauer & Fradella, 2008).

Deterrence theory can be outlined as “principles of certainty, severity, and celerity of punishment, proportionality, specific and general deterrence” (Burke, 2009). In order for the punishment to be effective it has to be certain, swift, severe. Certainty is more important than the severity in deterring crime. Deterrence theory confirms that if the punishment contains these three elements people will rationally calculate that there is more to be lost than there is to be gained from crime (Gordon, 2010). Deterrence functions

The way that we deal with criminals today is center and established based on how Cesare Beccaria defined and stated it. Who is Cesare Beccaria? Cesare Beccaria is an Italian scholar born in Milan, Lombardy, Italy on Saturday March 14, 1738. He died at the age of 56 in the same city on Friday, November 28, 1794. Cesare Beccaria was an Italian criminologist, a jurist, a philosopher, and a politician who is widely considered as the most talented jurist [3] and one of the greatest thinkers of the Age of Enlightenment. Recognized to be one of the fathers of classical criminal theory and modern penology, he is well remembered for his writings on “On Crimes and Punishments” written in 1764, which condemned torture and the death penalty, and was a founding work in the field of penology and the Classical school of criminology by promoting criminal justice. (citation)

Beccaria is known for being the founder of the Classical School. He wrote An Essay on Crimes and Punishment that was based on transforming punishment to corrections. He proposed reorientation of criminal laws toward more humanistic goals. On page thirteen of our textbook it shows the four of his newer ideas that were incorporated into the French Code of Criminal Procedures and in the French penal Code.

Cesare Beccaria is the “Father of Classical Criminology” and justified punishment on the principle of utility. Beccaria focused on reforming the Criminal Justice System and believed that punishment should be for the better good for society, as well as the individual, and deter others from committing crime and prevent criminals from recommitting crime. He believes effective punishment must certain, swift, and severe to get the desired effect on society and the offender (Robert, Cullen, and Ball 2015). He is also the author of his book Of Crime and Punishment, which discussed his philosophy on the purposes

One of the keys to success for the criminal justice system is the effective use of deterrence. General deterrence is a style of deterrence that punishment for offenders that is conducted in order to prevent other individuals in society from committing a similar crime. The United States criminal justice system is designed to benefit from the positive effects of a deterrence model in the court sentencing system. An article published in the 2015 Minnesota Law Review discussing the key components to deterrence stated, “Key to deterrence is a belief on the part of the person being deterred (1) that prohibited behavior will be detected and (2) that an immediate, negative consequence is certain to accompany any detected violation” (Klingele, p. 1633).

In this essay, I am going to discuss what some of the ideas are when it comes thinking as to why deterrence does not work, which could be that the harsher the crime, the harsher the punishment for many of the crimes committed. It could mean that it does not work because the offender maybe becomes aware of the punishment. However, it could be because of the notion of impulsivity which connected and is almost everywhere within a society where there has been a connection to the idea of rational choices, which has a role when it comes to the way people have been thinking about committing the crime of any shape or form. However, there have been many reasons why it doesn’t work, because the offenders come from many different walks of life within a society. Therefore, the kind of crimes that have been done, which can then have associated with rational choices, which have people are connected to in society.

Mark C. Stafford and Mark Warr argue the reconceptualization of deterrence theory. They argue that direct and indirect experiences with the punishment of crime can determine if either general or specific deterrence works. For the reconceptualization part of deterrence Stafford and Warr propose three advantages for their argument (Stafford and Warr). Derek B. Cornish and Ronald V. Clark argue for criminals using rational choice to decide whether or not to commit crime. They argue that the criminals starting point is to benefit themselves, committing crimes is based on their needs, and lastly Cornish and Clark say that a criminal’s decision process varies because of what the offender considers in the process (Ronald and Clark).

In the following paragraphs, deterrence and rational choice theory, two important ideas, will be discussed. Deterrence theory argues that people are more likely to be dissuaded from committing crimes due to fear of being caught, rather than using a moral sense of what is right and what is the wrong thing to do. The three elements of the deterrent effect of punish relies on the severity, certainty, and celerity of the punishment (Lab, 2016).

The author’s objective to the question of individuals learning from their offending experiences was a test of deterrability in his study as to the effects of criminal experience on perceived detection risk which he stated varies by criminal propensity. I agree with the author’s statement that “deterrence works differently for crime-prone individuals.” (p.1)

A rational person is thought to measure both the gains and losses before committing a crime and would more than likely to be deterred from violating the law they believed the loss was greater than the gain according to the deterrence theory. The deterrence theory is based on the belief that humans control their behavior based on the perceived rewards and punishments that would result from such actions. Which has led many theorists to believe that the proper to punish, a defiant act is by severe, certain, and swift punishment was the key to deterrence. The deterrence theory relies on three individual components: severity, certainty, and celerity. It is thought severe penalties, will desist from criminal acts, which thus prevent crime. However, if the sentence believed to be too harsh would be considered unjust. While, punishments not severe enough will not deter criminals from committing crimes.

One significant idea that focuses on the decision to commit crime is deterrence theory. Concepts of deterrence reflect the use of punishments that are swift, severe, and certain to control crime (Lilly, Cullen, & Ball, 2015). Deterrence theory assumes that individuals make a rational decision to either obey or break the law after calculating the costs and benefits of engaging in crime (Lilly et al., 2015). Typically, when the cost of the crime outweighs the benefits, individuals are likely to avoid criminal conduct. Although society continues to push for more severe sanctions, such as, mandatory minimums or capital punishment, research provides that these techniques fail at deterring crime (CITE). Therefore, the certainty of punishment more

It is better to try and prevent crimes than it is to punish them, this is achieved by good legislation which guides men to their greatest, or least unhappiness possible (Beccaria, 1767). As mentioned previously, Beccaria’s utilitarian ideology has shaped the justice system in western societies for many decades. Therefore, Beccaria can be described as a very influential thinker. Without his contribution we could still have a system of capital punishment, and that is a worrying thought. However, we now seem fixed with utilitarian justice. It may be argued that it is now time to move towards restorative justice. There are also those such as Tullock (1974), who argue for a return to harsher sentencing. Some states in the US still consider the death penalty to be a legitimate punishment. So it can be said that Beccaria is undoubtedly a key thinker in criminology, but as with all key thinkers he is not without his critics.

The two most common theoretical approaches that have informed offender rehabilitation efforts in dealing with acquisitive offenders are Felson’s (1994) Routine Activity Theory and Clarke and Felson’s (1993) Rational Choice Prospective Theory, which both take the approach of crime prevention

Classical Criminology first emerged in the 18th century when individuals started to rebel against the harsh punishments given across Europe and America. Punishments rarely fit the crime and were severe and excessive as a tool to scare individuals from committing crime. Before this, was considered the enlightenment period, which was an era of thinking crime, was solely the product of evil and deserved to be punished severely. Religious views dominated the criminal justice system suggesting criminality was the result of the devil. Punishments were often barbaric and ruthless. Then the feudal system started to develop and individuals were employed as police and judges to maintain social order. However the courts were unjust and usually lenient to those of the upper class. Cesare Beccaria (1738-1794) is probably most well known as the founding father of the school of classical criminology. He protested against the current legal system and pushed for those in power to see that individuals are rational beings and deserve rational repercussions. In his most popular work; Essay on Crimes and Punishments, he protested against the cruel punishments and suggested that they must only be equal to that of the crime itself and revolutionised the criminal justice system with his ideals on how to make the most effective punishment, without maximum damage of the individual. He believed that “Punishment is only justified to the extent that the offender has infringed the rights of others or