Is Retribution A Moral Justification For The Aim Of Punishment?

1713 Words7 Pages
Essay Question: Is retribution a moral justification for the aim of punishment? Punishment is the consequent effect that you get for doing a particular crime. Some of these punishments focus on just punishing the criminal, while others are about giving an effective punishment to make sure the person would not reoffend. There are two main theories of punishment, which are utilitarian and retributive theories of punishment. This essay will discuss the theory of retributive punishment with regards to its historical beginnings, key theorists supporting and critiquing this theory and how it is still being applied in this contemporary era. Retributive theory of punishment was all about getting a punishment for the crime. Retribution is the idea that a person should be punished simply because they are guilty. Retributionist does not care about trying to make the criminal a better person so that they can get back into the community again. Their point of view is that if you committed the crime then you deserve punishment. It was focused on looking at the damage the convict did and how they should punish them regardless of its consequences. As Niriella (2013, 235) quotes, it is “warranted as a response to a past event of injustice or wrongdoing”. This contradicts the restorative style of justice which is more forward thinking and focuses on the consequences and future events. There are two forms of retributivism, positive and negative retributivism. The positive retributivism is
Open Document