Sanctions, Perceptions, And Crime

375) and by using this hedonistic calculus people will refrain from committing crimes. This concept focuses on the punishment fitting the criminal and on preventing future crimes from occurring. The three most important factors in effectively deterring a criminal from further crimes are the severity of the punishment, the certainty of the punishment, and the swiftness of the punishment. If criminal doesn’t believe he will be punished or he feels the punishment is minor in comparison to the crime or if the punishment is not swift enough, then he/she will not be deterred from committing crimes. Studies on the effectiveness of deterrence have shown to be inconclusive. The deficient areas of deterrence are crimes committed in the heat of passions, crimes committed under the influence of drugs or alcohol, and the massive backlog of cases in the nation’s courts (Neubauer & Fradella, 2008).

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

It is estimated that general deterrence aims at making the offender to think twice before violating the law, because the physical and psychological pain that the offender will get through the action do not equate with the benefits of doing that action. Also, the general deterrence means that amount of penalties impose on the offender will stop others and deter them from committing crimes and prevents others form even thinking to commit the crime. That is because the human psyche is always tending to move away from the painful results.

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

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).

All things have their problems. Contemporary Theorist believes that, yes deterrence may stop some people but for other is causes a backlash effect. The authors of Criminology: Explaining Crime and Its Context explained backlash effect like this, “…stiffer penalties will generate more rather than less deviance among some segments of the targeted population” (Brown et al., P148, par. 3). A study by Gary Lafee and some of his colleagues showed how the backlash effect works. They results of their study showed that deterrence did occur but the backlash effect was much more. This study shows that punishment might stop some criminals, but not all of them are afraid of punishment (Brown et al., 2010, p 148-150).

As defined by Liedka, Piehl & Useem (2006), deterrence refers to the action against crime through the introduction of legal sanctions.

Do you think that any of the current punishments deter or reduce crime? Why or why not? Which punishment do you think is most likely to reduce crime in society?

Deterrence theory has many ideas as to what constitute deterrence. Some researchers think that it is the main purposes of our criminal justice system. They do agree that it is the main goal when it comes down to discouraging society from committing criminal deeds. Because, of fear of punishment for committing a crime. Some researcher would have you believe that the most powerful deterrent we have is our criminal justice system, because they are the ones that will make sure that violators will be punish swiftly if they break the law. Well, “this is unrealistic to believe that any criminal justice system could ever accomplish this goal, no matter how many law enforcement resources were dedicated to achieving it” (“Deterrence”, n.d.).

To the mind of a criminal, it is very logical - although of course not ethical-- to steal rather than work because he thinks it is worth taking the risks for the profits he gets from stealing. These are individuals with "deviant" motivations. As a factor that tends to reduce crime, incarceration has two main effects: imprisonment and deterrence. The imprisonment reflects the fact that a person who is in jail cannot commit crimes against others members of society because of his position. In contrast, deterrence seems to function better because the person thinks about the potential consequences of their actions. This distinction has become critical to relate it with the so-called laws of "three strikes" which is sentencing repeated criminals

Boyd (n.d), states that Deterrence theory says that people obey the law because they are scared of getting caught and being punished. Some seem to think with deterrence theory “that people don't commit crimes because they are afraid of getting caught - instead of being motivated by some deep moral sense” (Boyd, n.d).That they will be most likely to be deterred from committing a crime if the enforcement is certain, swift, and severe.

There are two types of deterrence, general and specific deterrence. General deterrence is a type of deterrence aimed at society as a whole. For example, documentaries and other forms of media give the general public a perception of life in prison as being not that appealing, which in theory will deter them from committing crime because they don’t want to go to prison. The other type of deterrence, specific deterrence is aimed at the individual and its goal is to discourage them from future criminal acts. For example, a person who has served time in prison may be deterred from

In classical theory, the main objective of study is the offence and the nature of the offender is a rational, free-willed, calculating and normal individual (Aker, 2012). However, it became apparent that some were more motivated to commit crime than others, regardless of deterrence. Therefore, the classical doctrine cannot account for re-offending. Based on empirical research done on convicted offenders, the notion of deterrence was rarely given thought of (Burke, 2013). Initially, most offenders give a lot of thought to the notion of punishment; however, in the process of committing the offence, offenders give little consideration to deterrence and consequences. As a result, this defies whether the purpose of deterrence is, in fact, achieving what it is meant to (Burke, 2013). The model is idealistic, that individuals could be controlled by the threat of punishment- by the likelihood of arrest, prosecution and

As stated above, as a criminal justice major, academically, I have gained the ultimate development and background of the Criminal Justice System and its practices from my Intro to Criminal Justice and Criminal Law class; how they implement the laws and apply them to crimes, offenses, and offenders. The whole concept of the criminal justice system is to uphold social control, deterring and mitigating crime, or execute sanctions for people who violate the law. Throughout my Criminal Justice courses, I found certain concepts interesting; the concepts that I found most important surrounding the Criminal Justice System were Deterrence, Rehabilitation, and Punishment. These three major factors are substantially the main functions and focus in regards to offenders. Deterrence, rehabilitation, and punishment are elements that help offenders readapt back into society so they can reestablish all of the mechanisms they need to be successful. They prevent future crime, implement reconstruction, and issue consequences. They are significant and crucial factors that the criminal justice system used to promote safety, change, and justice. Deterrence focuses on future behavior by both individuals and society. As a result of offenders receiving punishment, people will deter or discourage from committing crimes in the future. The hedonistic calculus argued that harsher punishment for committing a crime will cause pain rather than pleasure and crime would be prevented (Seiter, 2017). It is basically the concept of making the punishment outweigh the reward or pleasure. I learned that they are two kinds of deterrence which are specific and general deterrence. Specific deterrence is preventing an individual offender from repeating the same crime over in the future while general deterrence focuses on society as a whole and prevent them from committing a crime in the future (Seiter, 2017). The criminal justice system also believes that it is important to focus on the offender's attitude and behavior and tries to improve them for the can reenter into society as law-abiding citizens (Seiter, 2016). Because of my Corrections class, I learned that correctional facilities have all sort of programs the deal with drug/alcohol abuse, mental

Deterrence is a further purpose that needs to be highlighted. The aim of punishment is also to warn people from crime committing under the fear of being punished and it might be reached through the well-developed criminal justice system, one of the main aim of which is to ensure that every wrongdoer will be punished for the criminal acts. There are two kinds of deterrence. They are general and specific deterrence. Ferris defines specific deterrence as deterrence which attempts to persuade the individual before the court not to commit further offences, while general deterrence is defined as the process of persuading others who might be inclined to offend not to do so. Deterrence has its own pros and cons as well. One of the main deterrence benefits is that it may reduce crime rate significantly and sharply. For instance, there is a three strikes policy in most states of USA, which means that if an individual has already been in jail two times and if this person commits a third crime, she would be automatically sentenced for 25 years regardless of crime seriousness. On the other hand, the main drawback is that criminals usually think that they will not be caught, so they continue committing crimes.