Definitions Of Max Weber's Theory Of Rationalization Theory

For the most part, Kohler-Hausmann’s research focuses on the difference between the adjudicative and the managerial model of criminal law administration. On one hand, in the adjunctive model, the law is used to adjudicate guilt and provide an appropriate punishment for said crime (Kohler-Hausmann 614, 2014). On the other hand, under the managerial model the law is used to regulate people with little or no emphasis given towards guilt (Kohler-Hausmann 614, 2014). Kohler-Hausmann makes a significant statement about New York City’s use of the managerial model of criminal law. For one thing, “as low-level arrests dramatically climbed as part of an intentional law enforcement strategy, the rate of misdemeanor conviction markedly declined” (Kohler-Hausmann 615,

According to Paternoster (2010), the majority of Beccaria’s original deterrence ideals concluded that self-interest to commit an offense could be stopped by legal punishments that are definite, relational, and immediate. Paternoster (2010), determined that Beccaria provided the rational authority with applied strategies to make legal systems more cogent and effective. However, according to Paternoster (2010), Beccaria fell short in providing a developed theory of crime or criminal conduct; he also failed to provide a theory of behavior other than the conception that offenses are motivated by self-interest.

Secondly, they should be addressed the needs of offenders and the deficits in their lives that contributed to their offending. And thirdly, sentences should not be severe, intrusive, or damaging to an offender’s later decarceration to live a righteous life than is minimally necessary to achieve valid purposes of the sentence he or she receives (Tonry 508). An addition to these are proportionality, which means that sentences should correspond in severity to the seriousness of the crimes which they are inflicted. Also, regularity, which signifies that sentences should be guided by official standards to make the process clear, procedures fair, and allow judges to be more accountable (Tonry 508). Moreover, the American Criminal Code must be taken into consideration. Two features must be altered if the sentencing is to become fair, effective, and just. Firstly, the harsh sentencing laws must be revoked, and secondly the limits, that matches the offense seriousness, must be put on the lawful sentences (Tonry 514). Moreover, Tonry mentioned about future changes that, “If adopted, they would greatly reduce the number of people in prison in future years, but their adoption would not significantly reduce the scale of American imprisonment in 2015 or in 2020. Doing that will require enactment of new laws authorizing reconsideration of sentences now being served (Tonry 523).

Criminal law is a construct of the government, enforced through tangible measures. In a democratic society, the government is elected by the citizens, and as such, laws are generally conceived with the aim to reflect whatever ethical or moral standards are presently acceptable. However, in order to be truly effective, some legislation must circumvent current sociological viewpoints in order to create laws that are genuinely in the best interests of society. This results in a delicate balancing act, as lawmakers attempt to weigh the views of the majority against the need for laws to be both reasoned and objective.

In reviewing the court system of the United States there is a definite hierarchy between the trial courts, appellate courts and the supreme courts of both the state and federal levels. However, the actions of the court systems move at such a slow and hindered pace because of the bureaucracy of motions and objections among many others. The following is a review of the type of court system the United States has and why. Along with judges sentencing goals and philosophy; and sentencing innovations.

In today’s society crimes in the United State are growing each day, and the major aspect of the U.S criminal justice system is the punishment imposed on those who committed crimes in our communities. One method of sentencing criminals was the establishment of the mandatory minimum sentencing. During the early days of the republic, specific sentences were carried out for certain crime and early mandatory sentences the forms of punishment used at the time stretched from ducking stools/cucking stools for disorderly women and dishonest tradesmen in England, Soctland to hanging for convicted murderers. However, in recent years, evidence gathered have shown that the federal mandatory minimum sentencing were not in effect for reaching the goals of the criminal justice system. Chief Justice William Rehnquist has previously stated that “these statutes are “perhaps a good example of the law of unintended consequences. This essay will discuss the history, goals, benefits, and negatives of the American Judicial Systems Mandatory Sentencing.

Judicial discretion was prevalent over the first half of the last three decades, but has been regulated by legislature since 1984. Discretion by definition is the authorization of deciding as one thinks fit, absolutely or within limits (Ntanda, 1999). Indeterminate sentencing, traditionally, has afforded judges considerable discretion over the resolve of criminal sentencing. “While such discretion theoretically allows judges to tailor sentences to the circumstances of individual crimes and criminals, thereby achieving a sort of ex post fairness, it also permits variation in sentences that may not be warranted by the observable facts of the case, reflecting instead the judge’s own preferences” (Miceli, 2008, p.207). The punishment

When Bohn states that attempts to increase rationality can be irrational, he means that by attempting to increase productivity, organization can become irrational. In sort, the substitution of quantity for quality and the resulting mediocrity of both the process and the product causes irrationality (Giblin, 2014). In regards to McJustice, the Criminal Justice System has used plea bargaining and other sentencing procedures to create an “assembly line” in the criminal justice system. Focus is put on speed of getting cases resolved and any guilty plea is considered successful.

These fluctuations in criminal justice policies are not just in local governing bodies; these changes are an effort to adapt to a new technologically based modern age, and that goal of adaptation radiates to all ends of the earth, thereby having a global reach. As all societies, and populations of people alter and change, and belief systems ebb and flow, the rules and laws that govern such people must change with them. It is imperative that a governing system stay current, for without an ever-changing system of behavioral structure then those societies race faster toward

In one of the most important contributions to systematic thought about the administration of criminal justice, Herbert Packer articulates the values supporting two models of the justice process. He notes the gulf existing between the "Due Process Model" of criminal administration, with its emphasis on the rights of the individual, and the "Crime Control Model," which sees the regulation of criminal conduct as the most important function of the judicial system.

Although rationality does not always exist, much of the functioning of criminal justice agencies is unplanned, poorly coordinated, and unregulated. Existing systems include some components that are very ancient, additionally each of the institutions have their own set of goals and priorities that sometimes conflict with those of other institutions, or with the goals and priorities of the system as a whole. Furthermore, each of these institutions have substantial unregulated discretion in making particular decisions such as the victim's decision to report a crime (Frase & Weidner).

The utilitarian theory of punishment is another approach to the criminal justice system. Richard B. Brandt believes that this type of punishment is frequently found in Great Britain and the United States. He believes that utilitarian’s differ in their thoughts as to what is the “ideal” system would be but the punishment extended should be fair and that the threat of punishment may be more important than the punishment itself. Brandt discusses the difference in the prosecution and defense used to obtain maximum utility and how the punishment should be implemented and how to mitigate the punishment.

It should be noted however that the classical school of thought has had an enduring influence as many legal systems are built on some of its key precepts. The idea of intent for example, emphasizes the importance of the state of mind of the individual and their capacity for making choices. Notions of proportionality in relation to punishment are

Max Weber's theory of rationalization is an extensively studied theory within sociology. Weber’s theory uses the model of bureaucracy to symbolize the constant shifting ways of our society. Rationalization is the process of replacing rationally consistent rules for conventional or rather illogical rules within society. According to Weber, bureaucracy is the fundamental model of rational rule. They are extremely predictable, in both the job process but also labor production. Bureaucracies are more worried with the amount of production than the value of the product itself. Weber viewed this structure as ineffective and completely flawed.

This essay is a critical analysis of the theories given by Max Weber of leadership, religion and rationalization.