Beccaria 's Of Crimes And Punishment

Everyone has a free will to do whatever they want. People can choose or not to commit a crime. Classicalism developed its ideas from John Locke. He states that all men are created equal. Classicalism requires certainty and promptness. Fear requires certainty, where promptness is essential to make a lasting impression. Classicalism started in the eighteenth century. Cesare Beccaria argued for justice based on equality. When law enforcement was unjust and punishment was brutal, the people demanded justice for equality and punishment that was civilized. The whole idea for equality influenced the American Revolution, which its declaration explained that all men are created equal. I support this theory because it gives out an equal amount of punishment based on the crime; basically the crime is proportional with the punishment. Secondly classicalism removes criminals off the street by placing them in jail or prison for public safety. By reducing crimes the system is tough on the smaller crimes to prevent bigger crimes from happening. Plus having unequal approaches to punishment does not serve justice at all. I say this because

The classical perspective founded by Cesare Beccaria and Jeremy Bentham; stated that at people choose to commit crime after they considered the pros and cons that could be associated with a crime, and believed that the pros outweighed the cons (Tonry,2014). The theory relied on deterring criminal acts by assuring that the consequences of crime are absolute, harsh, and quickly administered (Tonry,2014).

The legitimacy of the use of capital punishment has been tarnished by its widespread misuse , which has clouded our judgment regarding the justifiability of the death penalty as a punitive measure. However, the problems with capital punishment, such as the “potential error, irreversibility, arbitrariness and racial skew" , are not a basis for its abolition, as the world of homicide suffer from these problems more acutely. To tackle this question, one must disregard the currently blemished universal status quo and purely assess the advantages and disadvantages of the death penalty as a punitive measure. Through unprejudiced examination of the death penalty and its consequential impacts, it is evident that it is a punishment that effectively serves its retributive, denunciatory, deterrent, and incapacitative goals.

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

Italian philosopher Cesare Beccaria is closely connected to rational classical criminology. Beccaria believed in fair and certain punishment to deter crime because he thought people were self-centered and egotistical. Fear of punishment would stop them from committing crimes. Beccaria thought that

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)

There are multiple strengths and weaknesses that stem from classical criminological theory. To understand these more clearly, one must also understand the system of law and order that was present in society when Beccaria constructed this theory. The leading theory on the causality of crime at the time was demonic possession; punishments included public executions and torture (Cullen et al The Origins of Modern Criminology 21). Kings were judge and jury in society, arbitrarily handing out punishments to crimes on an inconsistent basis. Knowing this, the strengths and weaknesses of the classical criminological theory become clearer. Determining personal responsibility and accountability to offenders was a serious strength versus the idea of demonic possession. Having laws in a society that are known and certain is another strength in light of inconsistent rulings by kings. Adequately severe punishments can also be considered a strength versus the torture and executions faced by criminals for any crime that could be committed. Along with these strengths are multiple weaknesses. The idea that all crime is committed to increase pleasure is a serious weakness that does not account for the realm of possible circumstances offenders face. Classical criminological theory does not account for any societal or biological factors that can come into play or influence potential offenders. Another weakness is the idea that deterrence

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.

This paper defines and analyzes Beccaria's concept of deterrence and the three key elements of punishment. The concept of deterrence is a classical school and rational choice model that emphasis punishment in order to deter crime. The three key elements of punishment used in order to deter crime include: the swiftness of punishment, the certainty of punishment, and the severity of punishment. It discusses which of these elements Beccaria thought was the most and least important, as well as my personal opinions. Also included in this paper are real-life examples of deterrence and the elements of punishment that they use.

Criminology is a field that has been researched prolong. Most of the information explaining crime and delinquency is based on facts about crime (Vold, Bernard, & Daly 2002, p.1). The aim of this paper is to describe the theories of crime and punishment according to the positivists Emile Durkheim and Cesare Lombroso, and the classical criminologist Marcese de Beccaria. The theories were developed as a response to the industrialisation and the modernisation of the societies in the 18th and 19th centuries and were aiming to create a rational society and re-establish social solidarity (Vold et al 2002, p.101). The criminological perspectives of crime and punishment will be discussed in a form of dialogue between the three theorists exploring

However, Classical school also emphasize new principles of criminal justice, including social system of penalty, legitimacy and legality of crimes. In this sense, no punishment without laws, individualization of punishments, legislative criminalization of acts, and fixed punishments graded in proportion to the gravity of crime. Many arguments were made on crimes and punishment, concerning

When it comes to the issue of crime prevention, Beccaria did not believe that the best way to reduce crime was to increase laws or increase the severity of punishment, since doing so would merely create new crimes and “embolden men to commit the very wrongs it is supposed to prevent” (Becarria [1764] 1963).

They thought that the crime and he punishment must be linked. They believed that the punishment should be in proportian to the crime in order for the offender to think about what he has done. for example, if someone is caught steeling 3000 pounds, then he should be made to pay back 4000 pound fine back. Or stay in prison for the same ammount of time that the person would have taken to earn the 3000 pounds. Cesear Beccaria believed that there should be a fixed punishment for crimes written into the law and not be changed.

This paper is on the Classical School theory that emerged in the eighteenth century; two writes of this period were Cesare Beccaria and Jeremy Bentham. Among the major ideas that descend from this theory are the concepts of humans as free-willed, rational beings, utilitarianism (the greatest good for the greatest number), civil rights and due process of law, rules of evidence and testimony, determinate sentencing, and deterrence. The writes during this period examined not only human nature but also social conditions as well. The Classical School, gave us a humanistic conception of how law and criminal justice system should be constructed. Law was to protect the rights of both society and individual, and its chief purpose was to deter criminal behavior, the law emphasized moral responsibility and the duty of citizens to consider full the consequences of behavior before they acted. This thinking required humans possessing free will and a rations nature.

Capital punishment is beneficial to the community. It provides the society with a sense of security. The death penalty contains a positive influence on the future. A heavily debated topic is, “Does capital punishment deter people more than a life sentence to prison?” An explanation on why will be covered later. An issues many people have with capital punishment, is when it is just or not just. This is a topic many stray away from, because it is difficult to decide. Finding the right consequence for an action is difficult. While this paper is for the use of capital punishment, it is clearly not needed for every crime, or even every murder. Overusing capital punishment, such as using it for every murder, will negatively impact the country, and not using it has the same effect.