Deterrence Theory And The Criminal Justice Field Essay

In the United States there are four main goals when it comes to punishment which are retribution, deterrence, incapacitation, and rehabilitation (DeJong, 2016, p. 288). The main goals for these punishments are to maintain order over society and to prevent recidivism (DeJong, 2016, p. 288). This ties into the Ecology perspective. By maintaining order over society and preventing recidivism, it ties into all of the issues regarding the Ecology perspective which requires for each issue to address the individual, family, community and society. Maintaining order over society and preventing recidivism strives toward making a safer environment for the individual, family, community and society. There is no universal agreement for making the severity of punishment just or fair (DeJong, 2016, p. 288). When it comes to retribution the person who is getting punished deserves the punishment (DeJong, 2016, p. 289). Retribution refers to when an individual commits a certain crime then that person must receive a punishment proportionate to that crime or suffering that they may have caused towards the victim (DeJong, 2016, p. 289). Regarding deterrence there are two types, general deterrence and specific deterrence (DeJong, 2016, p. 289). General deterrence focuses on the society in general and wants to scare everyone away from committing crimes (DeJong, 2016, p. 289). Specific deterrence focuses on criminals that have already been convicted and wants to prevent them from

As for the specific deterrence, it aims to deter the offender so as not to return to the commission of the offense again, the punishment and pain and their material and moral harm will prevent the offender

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 offender must have some type of punishment for the action he or she chose. Deterrence is a type of sentencing that prevent future actions of crimes. There is a general deterrence and specific deterrence. Specific deterrence is punishment that prevents the criminal to commit additional crimes by enforcing fear. "Back in the day", depending on the crime, the criminals would get parts of their body removed. For example, rapist were castrated. General deterrence is when examples are shown to prevent someone, that is contemplating on committing crimes, to change their minds. Sometime's when a person is put in jail it does not change their criminal minds.

Deterrence is founded on the assumption that people make rational choices about rather or not they wish to engage in criminal behavior. Thus, it is believed that one would weigh the gain they expect to achieve from a particular crime, to the expected cost of punishment. Punishment encompasses the likelihood of being caught and punished as well as the expected severity of the punishment. Therefore, in order to effectively deter, planner and criminal justice professionals must look into three factors: the severity of the punishment, the certainty of punishment, and the celerity with which the punishment is imposed. However, the severity of the punishment must be proportional to the benefit the criminal expects to realize from the

The Deterrence theory is a key element in the Criminal Justice System. It’s principles about justice appeal to us because it adapts to our ideas of what we identify as fairness. Punish the sinful and the ones who break the law, swiftly, to the extent that pain will dissuade them from committing a crime ever again. Its sole purpose, to instill fear. Fear of breaking the law because of its punishments. We not only use this theory to punish criminals, but it is a basis in which we raise our kids and pets on, that breaking the rules can lead to consequences. The deterrence theory says that people obey the law because they are scared of getting caught and being punished. It is said that people do not commit crimes because they are afraid of getting caught, instead they are being motivated by some other deep need. In my paper, I will address the two theorists who re-conceptualized the deterrence theory, the principles and two types of deterrence as well as give short insight into my own opinions on the deterrence theory.

Society has high expectations for criminal justice. Controlling the behavior of people is a difficult task, and there are several differing opinions on how this should happen. Many believe this can best accomplished by prevention through deterrence. Deterrence can be achieved from increased police patrols, good relationships with the community, and through tough penalties for convicted criminals. When deterrence fails, criminals need to be identified and held accountable for their actions. Law enforcement enforces many different crimes; some of the most serious crimes are violent crimes.

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).

Deterrence: is the use of punishment as a threat to cause and make someone decide to not to do something and offending. Deterrence is often compared with Retributive Justice, which is when punishment is held as a necessary consequence of a crime and is based on the severity of what has been done. It is used as fear to prevent other from committing similar crimes by scaring them as to what will happen

The questions of Sheriff Joe Arpaio's approach to penal incarceration should probably be broken down into two different issues: deterrence and rehabilitation. That is because deterrence does not occur in a vacuum; rather, the effectiveness of a deterrence approach depends substantially on what (if any) alternatives to criminal conduct are available to former offenders after their return to society. Deterrence by itself, without viable alternatives to continued criminal lifestyles is likely ineffective, largely because the constitutional provision prohibiting cruel and unusual punishment imposes limits on how unpleasant incarceration can be made to be.

Law, crime, and the concept of deterrence have existed simultaneously for thousands of years. Since Adam and Eve sinned in the Garden of Eden crime has been a prevalent aspect of society and always will be. Ever since there has been crime and as long as crime exists there will be efforts to deter people from committing crimes. Deterrence relies on fear and doubt to dissuade a person from committing a crime. However, does deterrence work? Many people think that deterrence does not work and tend to follow the logic of the rational choice theory. The rational choice theory says that everyone makes calculated choices based on the risk and the potential reward (Siegel, 2011).

It is very difficult to isolate and measure a deterrent effect precisely, because a great many things must happen before deterrence can occur. Three broad classes of extant studies are reviewed; (1) the relationship between objective sanctions, sanction enforcement, and risk perceptions. This research includes calibration studies and correctional studies. (2) The relationship between punishment experiences (personal and vicarious) and change in risk perceptions, in

Deterrence theory of crime is a method in which punishment is used to dissuade people from committing crimes. There are two types of deterrence: general and specific. General deterrence is punishment to an individual to stop the society as a whole from committing crimes. In other word, it is using the punishment as an example to “scare” society from precipitating in criminal acts. Under general deterrence, publicity is a major part of deterrence. Crime and their punishments being showing in the media or being told person to person can be used to deter crime. Specific deterrence is punishment to the individual to stop that individual from committing other crimes in the future. This type of deterrence is used to teach the individual a

To begin with, Deterrence is the belief that society can reduce crime by making punishment tougher than the benefits gained from criminal acts. To “deter means to prevent” a person of an act by the threat, warning, or as in imprisonment (Merriam-Webster, 2015). The death penalty serves as a powerful deterrent to people who may choose to commit major crimes. The issue with the Death penalty is the lack of ability of the justice system in carrying out the penalty immediately. The long appeal process compromises the deterrence reason of capital punishment. Some criminals are truly above the law, in that their influence can reach the outside world even if they are behind bars. For an example, recently in New York “two criminals used their outside

To begin with, it is necessary to say that punishment is an integral part of modern countries’ legal systems, because countries have a duty to protect society from wrongdoers and authorities could reach success in it by punishing offenders. Oxford English Dictionary defines punishment as the infliction or imposition of a penalty as retribution for an offence. There are four main purposes of punishment – incapacitation, deterrence, retribution and rehabilitation – and the aim of this paper is to