Sentencing is defined as the punishment given to an individual who has committed a crime. Sentencing and punishment is nothing new to criminology and has been the pivotal part of the criminal justice system since it began; what is in question is how that sentence will affect the individual and the greater society in the long term; sentencing and punishment although a prominent part of the system has not received major change since the implementation of classical theory and may need so due to the current changes emerging in society. Females have often been subject to inequality within the criminal justice system in regards to sentencing and crimes committed. This essay will conclude which argument proposes a better answer to sentencing and punishment …show more content…
Those in society who are poorer are more likely to be subject of mandatory sentencing schemes as seen in California when a man was incarcerated for 25 years for stealing a piece of pizza (vitiello 1997, p396). Summary offences should not be the target of mandatory sentencing, and only indictable offences to severely punish those who have less discipline to reform. Furthermore, legislation cannot define the conditions in which crimes are committed; this removes individual discretion on the case and creates a robotic society where humans no longer have the capability to understand …show more content…
Sentencing for a fixed period of time removes that notion. As previously outlined there is the possibility of unequal treatment of offenders who have done equal wrong (Braithwhite & pettit 1990, p21), the issue here is the introduction of mandatory sentencing becomes, parliament vs judges, which I feel judges who have actively seen the system in work for a number of years would be able to attend to more consistent results. Discretion is unavoidable in the criminal justice system (Brown et al. 2001, p121.) Judges and Juries are in a position to adapt to the case and review the sentence so it fits the nature of the offender and circumstances, where fixed sentencing does
An important issue that needs to be addressed within the Central Justice System is to have a reduction in the number of offenders in order to keep both society safe and reduce the population of prisons to an absolute minimum. A tool that is being widely used in order to manage and reduce recidivism rates among the average offender is the RNR model, however when it is used to treat different minority groups problems can arise as they all require different strategies in order to deal with their needs and make the model work. This essay will prove that the RNR model has the ability to reduce recidivism when it has been modified in order to accompany for the minority group of female offenders as well as highlight what challenges this specific group
For a majority of the 20th century, sentencing policies had a minimal effect on social inequality (Western and Pettit 2002). In the early 1970s, this began to change when stricter sentencing policies were enacted (Western and Pettit 2002). Sentencing laws such as determinate sentencing, truth-in-sentencing, mandatory minimum sentencing, and three-strikes laws were enacted with the purpose of achieving greater consistency, certainty, and severity in sentencing (National Research Council 2014). Numerous inequalities involving race, ethnicity, gender, and socioeconomic status have generated an unprecedented rate of incarceration in America, especially among minority populations (Western and Pettit 2010). With numerous social inequalities currently
Some unusual scenarios have come about due to these laws, particularly in California; some defendants have been given sentences of 25 years to life for such petty crimes as shoplifting golf clubs or stealing a slice of pizza from a child on the beach or a double sentence of 50 years to life for stealing nine video tapes from two different stores while child molesters, rapists and murderers serve only a few years. As a result of some of these scenarios the three strikes sentences have prompted harsh criticism not only within the United States but from outside the country as well (Campbell). Many questions have now arisen concerning the “three strikes” laws such as alternatives to incarceration for non-heinous crimes, what would happen if the state got rid of “strikes” and guaranteed that those convicted of a serious crime serve their full sentence? It is imperative to compare the benefits and the costs and the alternatives to incarceration when de...
The major goal of the Australian prison at the beginning of the 20th century was the removal of lawbreakers from their activities in society (King, 2001). The Australian legal system relies on deterrence (Carl et al, 2011, p. 119), that is, a system that has two key assumptions: (i) specific punishments imposed on offenders will ‘deter’ or prevent them from committing further crimes (ii) the fear of punishment will prevent others from committing similar crimes (Carl et al, 2011, p. 119). However it is not always the case that deterrence is successful as people commit crime without concern for punishment, thinking that they will get away with the crime committed (Jacob, 2011). Economists argue that crime is a result of individuals making choices
Hessick, C. (2010). Race and Gender as Explicit Sentencing Factors. Journal Of Gender, Race &
Embry, R., & Lyons, P. M. (2012). Sex-based sentencing: Sentencing discrepancies between male and female sex offenders. Feminist Criminology, 7(2), 146-162.
Statistical evidence has shown that women do in fact receive lesser and longer sentences when they are convicted of the similar crimes as men; such as drug related crimes (Coughenour, 1995). Criminologists provide different theories that explain the differences between male and female treatment in the criminal justice system. Once of the known theories that are express by the male counterpart that make up the criminal justice system is ‘chivalry’. By definition, ‘chivalry’ is the protection of women. This term start...
Mandatory sentencing is not anything new. It began in the 1970s. The main purpose for mandatory sentencing was to try to get rid of the drug lords and to eliminate most of the nation’s street drug selling. It was to impose that the same crime would have the same sentence all over the nation. Some of the negatives that rose from mandatory sentencing were nonviolent drug offenders and first time offenders who were receiving harsh sentences. Inmate populations and correction costs increased and pushed states to build more prisons. Judges were overloaded with these cases, and lengthy prison terms were mandated to these young offenders. Mandatory sentencing is an interesting topic in which I would like to discuss my opinions in going against mandatory sentencing. I will show the reasons for this topic, as well as give you my personal brief on which I support.
Mandatory minimum sentencing is the practice of requiring a predetermined prison sentence for certain crimes. The most notable mandatory minimums are the ones implemented in the 70’s and 80’s, hoping to combat the rising drug problem. Mandatory minimum sentencing has existed in the United States nearly since its very birth, with the first mandatory minimums being put into place around 1790. Recently, as the marijuana laws of many states have scaled back in severity, the issue of mandatory minimums has caused controversy in the US. There are two distinct sides to the argument surrounding mandatory minimum sentencing. One group believes we have a moral obligation to our country requiring us to do no less than lock up anyone with illegal drugs
Not everyone loves the ideas of alternatives to prison because alternatives to prison seem to work only when there is a limited number of cases that adhere to the sentence, However, when places like California is spending more money on their prison systems than on actual education, alternatives to prison seem to be the best choice (David, 2006).
Classical and contemporary theory helps to explain gendered crime patterns. The feminist school of criminology argue criminology and criminal theory is very masculine, all studies into criminal behaviour, have been developed from male statistics and tested on males. Very little research is conducted into female criminality, this may be because women who commit crime are more likely to be seen as evil or mentally ill rather than criminal, this is because women are labe...
Mandatory minimum sentencing laws also take away input of judges on specific cases and disregard uniqueness of circumstances. For example, in 2013, there was a widowed 55 year-old woman named Shirley Schmitt in Iowa who was sentenced to 10 years in prison for producing about 50 grams of methamphetamine. These laws targeted major suppliers of drugs such as drug traffickers or cartels to protect society but in Schmitt’s case, she was only feeding her addiction (“‘Should Mandatory Sentencing Be Repealed? Yes." Women in Prison.”). Since this case fell under the mandatory minimum laws, the judge’s authority was not taken into account for sentencing. In the March 3, 2017 issue of the Congressional Quarterly Researcher titled “Women in Prison: Should they be treated differently than men?” the author, Sarah Glazer, gave an anecdote of
Although much of the current scholarly information dichotomizes justice into two schools of thought, it should be realized that true justice encompasses both punishment-centered and rehabilitation-centered ideas. Often times, these ideas co-occur to create a more realistic depiction of justice in practice. Furthermore, a more honest approach toward policy should be examined and openly discussed by the Department of Justice. This way, the citizenry who participate in the democracy of the United States can have a better understanding of the issues regarding the type of punitiveness towards offenders. Doing so would encourage a better understanding and more agreeable state of the justice system, one that should be characteristic of the democratic process.
Provide the justifications for punishment in modern society. Punishment functions as a form of social control and is geared towards “imposing some unwanted burden such as fines, probations, imprisonment, or even death” on a convicted person in return for the crimes they committed (Stohr, Walsh, & Hemmens, 2013, p.6). There are four main justifications for punishment and they are: retribution, deterrence, rehabilitation, and incapacitation. There is also said to be a fifth justification of reintegration as well.
Offenders are protected today by both the rule of law, ensuring that all offenders are treated equally, regardless of their age, sex or position in the community, and due process, which ensures that all offenders are given a fair trial with the opportunity to defend themselves and be heard (Williams, 2012). Beccaria’s emphasis on punishment being humane and non-violent has also carried through to modern day corrections. It is still the case today that offenders must only receive punishment that is proportionate to the crime they have committed and the punishment is determined by the law. The power of the judges and the magistrates to make decisions on punishment is guided by the legislation and they do not have the power to change the law (Ferrajoli,