Sentencing a criminal for his crime may help to reduce the crime as a whole. The justice systems have made it their goals to impose sentences and punishments in order to provide an example to any other person who is thinking about committing that crime. People abstain from committing any crime when they know and fear the sentence is involved if they get caught. Some of the purposes to carry out criminal sentencing are reformation, retribution, deterrence, rehabilitation and incapacitation.
The rehabilitation strategy is usually carried out with a punishment. An imprisoned man may be given rehabilitative options like substance abuse counseling, mental health programming, or some education programs in order to keep him away from performing the crime again.
Reformation is similar to rehabilitation. Reformation theory believes that the shame associated with the sentencing may cause the criminal to see the wrongs of his action and help him to move away from that path.
How is each purpose of criminal sentencing served by indeterminate sentencing? By determinate sentencing? Which sentencing model (determinate or indeterminate) is more appropriate today? Why?
Intermediate punishment programs therefore include less strict programs that are barely intrusive to the high impact restrictive programs that involve house arrest and a stay in a correctional centre. Rehabilitation, reformation, retribution and other purposes may be easily used for less riskier criminals.
The same purposes and strategies may also be used in determinate sentencing. Determinate sentencing has set some guidelines that includes compulsory sentences with minimum effect and some long sentences for certain types of crimes.
Determinate sentence is a prison sentence that has a fixed length and cannot be changed by the parole officers or any other agency. In intermediate sentencing, the criminals show more progress than the criminals in determinate punishments, but it gives too much power in the hands of the parole officer. Determinate punishment is often seen to be a tough punishment. There is equal punishment for everybody committing the same crime. Intermediate provides proper rehabilitation programs that somehow help the criminal to start a new life. Thus intermediate punishment is more appropriate in todayâ€™s society or increased crimes.
If you need assistance with writing your essay, our professional essay writing service is here to help!Essay Writing Service
Do you believe that three-strike laws can be an effective deterrent to crime? Are three-strike laws economically efficient? Explain your answers.
The three-strike rule commands a minimum of 25 years to life sentence for the offenders who have any previous violent convictions as well. Around 23, 000 people have been imprisoned under the three-strike law. This lay attempts to decrease the crime rate either by imprisoning deterring potential offenders or habitual offenders from performing crimes in the future. The effect of three-strike law can be judged by examining the impact of the law on crime in the state of California, which regularly imprisons the criminals under this law.
The three-strike law was passed in California in 1994 with the intention to lower the crimes by harshly punishing the offenders. But economically speaking, it is not the most effective law. The State of California spends around $5.7 billion on jails and prisons, which is more amount that they spend on education. Most of the crimes are occurred under the influence of drugs and alcohol or under the state of anger. Punishing them with life imprisonment may cause people to act more violently resulting the offender to perform a prison escape or murder a witness. So the money spent on the law goes to waste.
What is restorative justice, and how does it build on restitution? How does it differ from retribution as a purpose of criminal punishment?
Restorative justice emphasizes on the necessities of the criminals, victims and the community involved in it. In the whole process, the offenders are taught to accept responsibilities of their actions. They are encouraged to mend the damage they have done by doing community work, returning stolen goods and apologizing for their actions. Restitution is the action of returning and compensating for the damage and loss to the rightful owner. When a court orders the act of restitution, the defendant has to pay victim for his or her loss.
The retributive punishments given to an offender changes his behavior as he goes through different programs. It focuses on establishing shame of guilt of what he did. Restorative justice focuses on what should be done in order to make his or her future more reliable and full of obligations. The programs that the offender goes through, ensures harmony and good relations with his community. It emphasizes on negotiation and dialogues and involves direct involvement with other participants.
Our academic experts are ready and waiting to assist with any writing project you may have. From simple essay plans, through to full dissertations, you can guarantee we have a service perfectly matched to your needs.View our services
Do you believe that capital punishment should continue to remain a viable sentencing option for especially heinous crimes? Why or why not?
Capital punishment is a legal process in which a person is sentenced to death as a punishment for his crime. It is being carried out in 58 nations currently and 97 have abolished it. It is often defended with the reason that a society should be protected for the safety of its citizens and when incidents like murders happen, they threaten the safety of our community.
If the threat of a capital punishment remains in the society, it will stop a lot of criminals to perform certain heinous crimes that would ruin the peaceful co-existence of the society. Granting death penalties would also be setting an example to other offenders and it would make them think twice before committing any crime.
The death penalty may be unjust in some case because the bad man with a good lawyer may win the case and the innocent might be punished instead. So it will waste a human life that otherwise would have had a whole life in front of him.
How are habeas corpus appeals limited in capital cases? Explain the underlying rationale.
Habeas Corpus is one of the rights that are provided by the constitution to each American citizen. In simple meaning, this right means that every citizen has â€œa body,â€ but in literal sense it is the right of every citizen who has been arrested to have a trial in court to be judged whether he has been detained rightfully or not.
Habeas Corpus is not against the arrests that are unlawful, instead itâ€™s a right given to a person so that he can be released lawfully from detention after his arrest. It is not performed as a substitute of a trial; neither does it prove the innocence or guilt of a person. It is a simple right that is put forward to specify that a person was detained and to justify his arrest.
After the 9/11 attacks, most of the detained were known to be the terrorists. So most of them are not given the option to appeal against the capital punishment because they are considered to be terrorists that are worthy of getting a capital punishment. The appeals are overruled or not even given a chance and the offender instead receives brutal behaviours from the officers as well.
Cite This Work
To export a reference to this article please select a referencing stye below:
Related ServicesView all
DMCA / Removal Request
If you are the original writer of this essay and no longer wish to have your work published on UKEssays.com then please: