Sentencing Reforming Act Amendment Analysis

The purposes of sentencing are set out in the Crimes (Sentencing Procedures) Act 1999 (NSW) and fundamentally include deterrence, retribution, rehabilitation and incapacitation as the purposes by which a judge may impose a sentence. Deterrence intends to

Three salient points from the films/lectures were assessments of change from the five stages of change model (Norcross, j. c., n.d.), the Fair Sentencing Act for mandatory minimum sentences (American Civil Liberties Union, 2010), and eliminating government involvement in regulation of drugs and alcohol substance, while allowing the various states to manage control (ABC News.com, 2007).

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).

Statistical elaboration has shown that decreasing the prison population does not affect the well being of the community. Diminishing overcrowding within our jails should be of great importance for state administrations. Our President Barack Obama signed the Fair Sentencing Act into effect in 2010. The method must be two-fold: first, understand how the Fair Sentencing Act works, and second, put a greater emphasis on the recommendations given in reducing the disparity in sentencing.

The classical perspective founded by Cesare Beccaria and Jeremy Bentham; stated that at people choose to commit crime after they considered the pros and cons that could be associated with a crime, and believed that the pros outweighed the cons (Tonry,2014). The theory relied on deterring criminal acts by assuring that the consequences of crime are absolute, harsh, and quickly administered (Tonry,2014).

This essay explains sentencing in the United States Criminal Justice system. The objectives of punishment in the United States corrections is to help deter crime and to ensure reoffenders don’t reoffend. Sentencing impacts the corrections system and society in a positive manor by eliminating offenders out of the community. Sentencing may include one of the following: probation, fines, prison, community service, probation and so forth depending on the state you reside and the type of offense you commit. Each crime committed doesn’t have a set sentence, therefore they are determined on a case to case basis. The main goal of the criminal justice system is to defend the community and serve justice. Sentencing plays a vital role in the Criminal Justice system.

The Sentencing Reform Act is associated with the Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1984, were the U.S. federal statute increased the consistency in the United States federal sentencing. The Sentencing Reform Act created the United States Sentencing Commission. This act allowed the independent commission into the judicial branch of the United States Sentencing Commission. It consists of seven voting members and one nonvoting member. For the sake of the United States Sentencing Commission, there are regulations that establish sentencing policies and practices for the Federal criminal justice system, which ensures a meeting of the purposes of sentencing. Judges are also bestowed the power to determine the legitimacy of convictions. The aspiration of the Sentence Reform Act was to avoid unwarranted sentencing disparities among defendants with similar records who have been found guilty of similar criminal conduct Also to allow the Judicial system to process....

She argues that the reforms suggested by the conservative party would cause unintended harm to the people they are attempting to help. The author forms her argument by analyzing the prison reforms initiative put forth by republican politicians. Bruenig concludes that these attempts to bring needed modification to the criminal justice system have not improved the lives of disadvantaged people. By focusing on cutting prison costs the author states, the conservative’s suggestion for reform will fail to provide support to community programs that help people stay out of prison. This would make the reform meaningless. It would also rid communities of prevention programs.

The increase in violent rapes and murders being committed by paroled prisoners in Victoria, such as those committed by Adrian Bailey in 2012, and Sean Price in 2015, have led to the tightening of parole laws, removal of suspended sentences, and introduction of new mandatory sentencing laws. However, while these laws can be an effective way of reducing crime, reducing reoffending by 17-20 percent (Helland and Tabarrok, 2007), they also are a departure from the doctrine of the separation of powers (Solonec, 2015). The purpose of this essay will be to assess how detrimental the removal of objective sentencing will be to society, through the implementation of policies such as mandatory sentencing, stricter parole laws, and the removal of

The elemental purpose of sentencing is to contribute to, along with crime prevention initiatives, the idealistic view of a safe society and respect for the law by imposing precedents that have one or more of the following objectives: denouncing unlawful conduct, deterring the offender from committing further offences, isolating the offender from society when necessary, to assist in rehabilitating

Until the early 1970s, the sentencing of crime convicts was based on the principle of rehabilitation of juvenile and adult offenders. Legislatures set maximum authorized sentences for various types of crimes and judges decided on the prison term or probation or fines. Correctional officials and parole boards had the powers to reduce the time served for good behavior and release prisoners early. In the 1980s and 1990s, the emphasis shifted to deterrence by imposing mandatory minimum sentences for certain types of crime, heavier sentences for habitual offenders and the “three-strike” rule for felony convictions. Public opinion supported these changes in the belief that prison terms were just retribution for crimes and incarceration kept criminals off the streets (Mackenzie, 2001).

If I were sitting on the President’s Council for probation and parole reform, there are four recommendations I would make. These recommendations would aim to increase the success of probation and parole in the United States. In order to improve outcomes for probation and parole, there are necessary steps to take to reduce the state prison costs. One recommendation is the need to create a program that can provide more incentives financially to departments in order to minimize state prisons. I suggest funding the program through private sectors and savings organized through the funds paid by probationers. Probation departments use incentives payments and promote better safety for the public. (Latessa & Smith, 2011) The new program should involve

Prison reform is a significant issue that the United States government should enforce. It would aid in creating a more organized system of incarceration. Prison reform is an attempt to improve, change, or eliminate certain conditions in prisons. It is believed that it should be enforced due to the cases of overcrowding, lack of proper education, and the lack of rehabilitation that could inform prisoners of societal values. Prison reform would increase the self-esteem that was diminished in the prisoner’s personal history. Prison reform is significantly important as it will heighten the amount of self-worth in the prisoner and cause a decrease in the population of prisoners who return to a life of crime. Recidivism, or chance of recommitting a crime, will therefore be reduced. Prisoner who are released will not have all the negative ideals or influence from the prison that is usually spread until their release. Prison reform will help society if the increase in education and decrease in overcrowding is ensued upon the prison system with this policy.

Today punishment is the most dominant correctional goal of both the state and federal government in response to criminality. The purpose of punishment is to protect society, rehabilitate criminal offenders, and reduce recidivism. In both the state and federal correctional institutions, their objectives are to use punishment as form deterrence while

This belief indicated that if offenders could not be rehabilitated then they should be punished and it was time to get tough on crime. Within a relatively short time parole was attacked and the individual approach of indeterminate sentencing, or release by the authority of a parole board was abolished in 16 states (Rhine, Smith, and Jackson, 1991) and some form of determinate sentencing was adopted in all 50 states (Mackenzie, 2000)].