Bentham Opposes ‘Three Strikes And You’Re Out’ Laws. Pain

Good Essays
Bentham opposes ‘Three Strikes and You’re Out’ laws. Pain and pleasure dictate what we should do and what is right and wrong. It is about maximizing the pleasure and minimizing the pain. ‘Three Strikes and You’re Out’ laws does not bring pleasure to society when a person goes to jail for life for stealing a pizza or a small amount of marijuana. These acts are wrong, but they are not evil. The value of pain and pleasure is based on the intensity, the duration, the certainty or uncertainty, and its nearness or remoteness. For instance, the pain of a stolen pizza and a murder, the intensity of the pain is not the same, nor does it last as long (hours as oppose to a lifetime). More so, “utility is meant the property of something whereby it…show more content…
Of course, the man hides his valuables and the burglar dies. If this situation is not a form of excessive punishment, then ‘Three Strikes and You’re Out’ is not excessive. Even so, he would say “fallibility, logically, has more to do with whether we should punish at all, or how harsh our harsher punishment should be, than whether our punishment should be scaled according to the gravity of the crime” (Lawrence, 76). In addition, a very important factor would notice. In his Doomsday machine example, he made a point to inform us that the population would know about the machine and what it does. Alexander would say, “Once the [criminal] have been warned (the notice principle), and because they have no right to [commit the crime] in the first place (the wrongful act principle), they have no right to demand proportional response if that is more costly in terms of other values” (Lawrence, 79). In the same scenario, he would not consider the laws unfair if there is prior notice and if it only reacts to wrongful acts. The law stipulates that anyone convicted of two prior felonies would get 25 to life in prison for any crime. First, the population is notified. Second, it has to do with wrongful acts. He violated rights prior to triggering the life sentence. Basically, he took a chance. In the circumstance where a person believes the wrongful act is right, a crime of passion, or mentally ill, Alexander would say a few
    Get Access