The For Punishment - Original Writing 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

Crime and punishment wasn't as easy in the 1800s as it is now. This research paper will inform you about the crime and punishment in the 1800s.

Capital Punishment is an issue that has been argued over from the dinner table in

The concept of mandatory sentencing is a relatively new idea in the legal field. It was first introduced in 1951 with the Boggs Act, and it made simple marijuana possession a minimum of two to ten years with a $20,000 fine. This was eventually repealed by Congress in 1970, but mandatory sentences came back with the passage of the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986. Since then, the scope and presence of mandatory sentencing has only grown, especially mandatory sentences for drug related offenses. Recently, there has been a growing concern over the use and implementation of mandatory minimum sentencing, with many believing it reduces a judge’s ability to give out a sentence that they feel accordingly fits the crime. Many advocates for mandatory

Sentencing bias occurs in most of the court cases in the United States of America. Sentencing bias can include races such as Hispanic/Latino, Asian Americans, White Americans, and Native Americans. This brings us to talk about sentencing disparities? In which a court case trial is not treated the same or it is treated differently than other cases. However, who faces the most disparities in sentencing? Could it be African American’s who face’s the most trends and Asian American’s the least trends in sentencing disparities? Or could it be Hispanic/Latino’s who are the least victims of sentencing disparities? Many authors have studied the trends of sentencing disparities, and they have encountered many findings. Many of these findings were found by researching case studies. Criminologists and researchers looked at misdemeanor cases, felony cases, and as well as simple traffic violations. Sentencing occurs in even the smallest traffic violation, because the offender of the ticket still has to attend court to fight to ticket.

As a result of the implementation of mandatory sentencing polices and get tough on crime laws that began in the 1970s, dementia has become just one of the rising age-related infirmities that has plagued the growing aging prison population, drastically increasing prison cost for these individuals. The New York Times editors argue that in order to address the rising caseload of aging inmates in need of mental health care “states must pursue other avenues.” They suggest that states “foster partnerships between prisons and nursing homes to improve the quality of care; consider compassionate release programs for frail inmates who no longer present a threat to public safety; and, no less important, revisit the mandatory sentencing policies that did away with judicial discretion and filled the prisons to bursting in the first place” (“Dementia Behind Bars,” 2012).

Chose a character who might-- on the basis of the character’s actions alone-- be considered evil or immoral. Explain both how and why the presentation of the character makes us react more sympathetically than we otherwise might.

Judicial discretion was prevalent over the first half of the last three decades, but has been regulated by legislature since 1984. Discretion by definition is the authorization of deciding as one thinks fit, absolutely or within limits (Ntanda, 1999). Indeterminate sentencing, traditionally, has afforded judges considerable discretion over the resolve of criminal sentencing. “While such discretion theoretically allows judges to tailor sentences to the circumstances of individual crimes and criminals, thereby achieving a sort of ex post fairness, it also permits variation in sentences that may not be warranted by the observable facts of the case, reflecting instead the judge’s own preferences” (Miceli, 2008, p.207). The punishment

Even though there’s always going to be different opinions regarding the death penalty. I believe that the criminal should serve life in prison and pay for their crime that way. Rather than being executed because it is not really that accurate so instead of making a big deal about death penalty the government should focus on ways to prevent crimes. However the government pays more attention to what punishment the criminal will receive. In, Sentencing For Life, the author writes, In Alabama, U.S. Court of Appeals Judge Edward Carnes, who headed the state's capital punishment division as assistant attorney general for many years, said that "life without parole in Alabama means just that--no parole, no commutation, no way out until the day you die, period." (Dieter 13). Life imprisonment is a more convenient way for not only society but it benefits the government too by not spending too many resources on the criminal. In, Sentencing For Life, the author states, “From all indications, America could be safer without the death penalty and would realize an enormous monetary saving as well. Judging by the crime rates in those states that have abolished capital punishment and

Why does love demand suffering? In Fyodor Dostoevsky’s Crime and Punishment Raskolnikov accepts love from Dunya, Sonya, and Pulcheria. This topic allows for the exploration of the relationship between love and suffering. The relationship between love and suffering demands to be explored because without suffering, the true value of love will never be determined. Does suffering demand love? Is suffering only for love, is there any other form of suffering? For love to be present, must suffering also be present? Is there no love without suffering? Throughout the novel, there have been parallels between love and suffering, displayed by: Raskolnikov and Sonya, Svidrigailov and Dunya, and Sonya and Marmelodav. Once exploring the type of suffering that each characters bears, it will then be contrasted with the type of suffering that the other character

For centuries governments have acted on behalf of society removing and punishing criminals with the goal of protecting its citizens. Criminals were arrested and locked-up in jails awaiting their sentencing. Once sentenced, they were publically humiliated, tortured, or killed. Early forms punishments were cruel and mostly focused on retribution.

  The American government operates in the fashion of an indirect democracy. Citizens live under a social contract whereby individuals agree to forfeit certain rights for the good of the whole. Punishments for crimes against the state are carried out via due process, guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment. The use of capital punishment is decided by the state, which is legal in thirty-seven states. It is a moral imperative to protect the states' rights to decide their own position on the use of capital punishment.

The Different Aims of Sentencing There are a number of reasons why a society punishes offenders. These include, among others, to discourage the offender from committing further crimes (individual deterrence), to help the offender, so that he or she won’t offend again (rehabilitation), to prevent the offender from committing further crimes through imprisonment (incapacitation) and to show society’s disapproval of the crime (denunciation). Retribution is to punish on the premise that it is a payback for the offence (Retribution carries with it the notion of “Do the crime, do the time”) Reparation is aimed at compensating the victim of the crime usually by ordering the offender to pay order to

The main purpose of the sentencing is to protect the public and to ensure that justice is done. The purpose of sentencing for those 18 and over is defined by section 142 (1) Criminal Justice Act 2003

Punishment has been in existence since the early colonial period and has continued throughout history as a method used to deter criminals from committing criminal acts. Philosophers believe that punishment is a necessity in today’s modern society as it is a worldwide response to crime and violence. Friedrich Nietzche’s book “Punishment and Rehabilitation” reiterates that “punishment makes us into who we are; it creates in us a sense of responsibility and the ability to take and release our social obligations” (Blue, Naden, 2001). Immanuel Kant believes that if an individual commits a crime then punishment should be inflicted upon that individual for the crime committed. Cesare Beccaria, also believes that if there is a breach of the