Model Of Punishment

I am going to write an essay on the retributivist approach and reductivist approach on punishment, comparing and contrasting both theories. To start off I will talk about the retributivism theory and the belief that an offender should be punished based upon the severity of the offense. I will them move onto just deserts which Is a modern retributivist theory which only focuses on crimes that have already committed making sure individuals get there just deserts for doing wrong. Next I will write about the reductivist theory which is all about trying to deter individuals from committing a crime or reoffending. Jeremy Bentham had a huge impact on reductivism believing if pain was to outweigh pleasure then it would deter individuals and overall nobody would have the desire to commit a crime as they are aware of the consequences they would have to face. Moving on to deterrence will talk about the two different types of deterrence; individual and general deterrence. Individual deterrence focuses on stopping individuals from reoffending whereas general deterrence is about deterring individuals who have never even committed an offence from turning to crime. Once writing about both retributivism and reductivism I will start to compare and contrast both theories, looking at the similarities and differences. Finally I will give my own opinion on the theories and which theory I believe is best, talking about how retributivist and reductivist punishments are different and the good and

Punishment refers to the deliberate or intentional infliction of pain and suffering on an individual for breaching a particular law or code of conduct established in a given society. The idea of punishment has been in existence for a long stretch of time in history with philosophers weighing upon the necessity or otherwise of punishment. Inasmuch as a considerable number of philosophers agree that

Once the accused was convicted of his crime, the court moved into the punishment phase. Interestingly enough, the process of deciding punishment was quite a flawed one. The reason for this was that most people's perceptions of criminals in the beginning and mid 1800s was that they were people of the working class who were too lazy to work (Emsley). This led to a bias in which working class people seemed to be receiving harsher punishments than any other class except one (Emsley). Although rare, if a woman was convicted of a crime, they would receive some of the harshest punishments (Victorian Crime) The reason for this was because it was perceived as unladylike as “Not only had they transgressed the law, they transgressed perceptions of womanhood,”

In order for us to understand the moral theories surrounding the justification of punishment we must first accept that punishment exists to benefit the society we live in. Punishment as a whole should protect a community by sanctioning crimes to a significant degree whilst preventing them from reoccurring. If a punishment does not protect a community it is believed that that punishment is unjust and will be unfair to both the criminal and the community members. I believe that a retributivist style of punishment only focuses on the treatment of the singular rather than that of the masses. It is for this reason that I will argue why a consequentialist or utilitarian theory best allows us to understand the justification of punishment.

This paper will provide the behavioral definition of punishment and give examples of both positive and negative punishment in different types of settings. The guidelines for the effective use of punishment, as well as legal and ethical issues that should be considered by the Behavior Analyst while designing a behavior intervention plan are identified.

"Crime and Punishment" By Fyodor Dostoyevsky is a chilling, yet brilliant crime thriller about a young man who feels as though he is superior to others and has an intelligence of exceptional standards. He commits an appalling crime, murder, and the story goes on to tell about his guilt, how

|Kaplan University | |Sentencing Models | |Determinate, Indeterminate, and Mandatory Sentencing | |Christopher Boone | |1/1/2012 | The nation’s sentencing model consists of three general types of sentences. These three different types are determinate, indeterminate, and

In my opinion, I feel that it is up to the individuals themselves and the need pursued for effective improvements in their life. Therefore, regardless of the threat of punishment or individual acceptance, the individuals should be on board with treatment or the effectiveness will be ineffective which will increase the rates of recidivism.

In this essay, I will argue that equal punishment and proportional retribution do not justify the use of the death penalty. First, I will argue that equal punishment is too specific and literal because it stems from the idea that one crime is deserving of that exact crime in the form of a legal punishment. In the case of murder, that belief would condone punishing murder with murder. We can’t justify some killings while condemning others. By giving permission to someone to execute another human being on the grounds of the death penalty, we are allowing him or her to kill another human being for killing. This creates a cycle of murder. Second, I will argue that proportional retribution does not leave the death penalty as the only option for punishment. However, it does give much room for interpretation and is not specific enough regarding alternative punishments. It would allow us to rank crimes according to severity and dole out punishments according to that scale. I will also bring up how retributive justice does not completely delve into the concept of who deserves to deliver the punishment to the murderer. Retributive justice is simply a means of attempting to legally inflict suffering upon another human being for their wrongful actions.

Mini Paper 1 Leon Nelson Liberty University Punishment Philosophy Punishments vastly vary in terms of their underlying philosophies and forms. Fundamental punishment philosophies involve deterrence, retribution, rehabilitation, restoration, and incapacitation. In terms of form, punishments come as either formal or informal depending on the legitimate authority held by the sanctioning body. While

Over the years, America has used punishment to deal with non-law abiding citizens. Punishment can be defined as the infliction of a consequence to an offense. In this essay I will talk about what is punishment, the different forms of legal punishment, and the effeteness and my opinion about them. One of the most talked about topics in criminal justice is how to deal with criminals? In today’s world we just punish the person and not try to find out the reason for the crime. In the criminal justice system we punish offenders in hopes of deterring them and society from ever recommitting the crime again. One of the most common ways we try to deter crime is by incarceration, asset forfeiture, fines, probation/parole, death penalty, etc…. Incarceration

Mayte Gamory Professor Conley Final Paper 18 December 2017 Punishment is defined as “the infliction or imposition of a penalty as retribution for an offense” (“Punishment”). Some prominent theories of punishment include retribution, deterrence, rehabilitation, and the moral education theory. Although retribution, deterrence, and rehabilitation are all crucial components of punishment justification, independently the theories have weaknesses that avert the moral rationalization of punishment. I believe that Jean Hampton’s moral education theory is the best justification for punishment because it yields the most sympathetic and prudent reasons for punishment, while simultaneously showing that punishment cannot be justified by solely

Theories of why we punish offenders are crucial to the understanding of criminal law; in fact it is not easy to define legal punishment, however one thing is clear within the different theories of punishment is that they all require justification.[1] There are many theories of punishment yet they are predominantly broken down into two main categories. The utilitarian theory seeks to punish offenders to discourage, or “deter,” future wrong doing. The retributive theory seeks to punish offenders because they deserve to be punished due to their behaviour upsetting the balance of society[2].

The purposes of punishment. What are the purposes of punishment? Which do you consider to be the most important and why?

Throughout time, the use of punishment has changed drastically. Not only has the actual infliction of punishment changed, the reasoning behind this punishment has also changed. There have been numerous scholars, educators, and researchers that have presented various theories on the reasoning behind societal punishment. Some of these theories are closely similar, however some are drastically different. It is important to note that these theorists have broad perceptions that can be rooted back to specific time periods throughout history. Societal punishment is defined as, “punishment being a complex social institution, shaped by the ensemble of social and historical forces and having a range of effects that reach well beyond the population of offenders” (Garland, 1991).