As Joe Arpuio states “getting tough on crime,” the tougher retributive punishments are, may again deter crime. Deterrence- Deterrence is the intention to prevent future crimes from taking place, becoming split into two specific types of deterrence, general and specific. General deterrence is “actions that take place to persuade other persons from committing criminal acts” (Couture, 2014, p. 128). While specific deterrence is “punishments aimed at stopping... ... middle of paper ... ...ause it deals with society as a whole. Yes, general deterrence may use certain individuals as an example for society, but if the punishment for that certain individual is strict enough and is able to deter others from society from committing crime it is doing its job.
2009). He also emphasized that the type of punishment should fit the crime. Another idea he had regarding the intended objects of punishment is essential to modern criminological sciences. The term “specific deterrence” means that the punishment should act as a deterrent for that individual. “General deterrence” means that if the public sees or hears of punishment that was rendered, the knowledge might deter other citizens from committing similar offenses (Levinson 2002).
Although Beccaria believed that severity is a necessary element for deterrence, it should be limited depending on the extent of severity. It should be severe enough to make the offender realize that the reward of the crime did not outweigh the consequences. There are two types of deterrence, which are general deterrence and specific deterrence. “General deterrence intends to deter all people from committing crime by making an example of those who have” (Owen et al., 2012, p. 267). This creates a fear among people from penalties and convinces them that committing crime will cause more pain than pleasure.
The second kind of deterrence is specific deterrence which targets offenders and scares them into not wanting to return to prison. This part of the theory strives to discourage recidivism and touches more on the justice part. In order to scare of an offender he must be given a
Many people often confuse deterrence with retribution or punishment, but that it is not. Instead of serving your “debt to society” for a crime you committed, under the principal of deterrence you are serving your punishment to keep you and your neighbors from doing the same crime. Operating according to the deterrence model necessitates two principal assumptions: that imposing a stiff penalty will dissuade someone from committing crimes in the future and secondly, that the fear of this punishment will prevent future crimes perpetrated by others. (Wright, 2010) One very important idea here is that it is a “stiff” penalty, a penalty that others won’t forget. There are many faults in this argument, with the largest being the amount of faith put into mankind.
Crime Deterrence: Methods and Potential Problems Crime deterrence is the decline of crime, because people fear getting arrested and convicted. According to Probation and Parole: Theory and Practice by Howard Abadinsky “the classical school argues that because humans tend toward hedonism- that is, they seek pleasure and avoid pain- they must be restrained, by fear of punishment, from pleasurable acts that are unlawful.” People make a rational decision not to commit a crime because of the fear of arrest and conviction are taken into consideration. Two Types of Deterrence There are two types of crime deterrence, individual (specific) deterrence and general deterrence. “Specific deterrence is the belief that punishment will reduce the likelihood
Discuss how the concepts of deterrence and rehabilitation can work together or not. The concepts of deterrence and rehabilitation are topics often talked about in the criminal justice world. Deterrence is a method used to stop crime from happening through fear of repercussion. While rehabilitation takes place after the offence has been committed to hopefully prevent further crime .The concept of deterrence is that you stop the “would-be” offenders from acting, by putting the idea into their head that the consequence of the crime will outweigh any gain, or satisfaction experienced. This is supposed to prevent or “deter” the person from acting on the thought/idea.
The other key leader Bentham, argued that the purpose of punishment should be to show people that the cost of the crime outweighs the gains of it, he was a supporter of the use of prisons and thought that punishment should be proportionate to the crime and have predictable, certain consequences to deter people from future offences. One
In other words, a person’s fear of punishment along with their knowledge of his/her probability of apprehension and punishment plays a role in the decision making of individuals who are considering committing a crime (Akers, 16). According to Akers and Sellers, there are two types of deterrence. Specific deterrence assumes that apprehended and punished offenders will not re-commit crime because of their knowledge of the certainty and severity of their punishment when they were caught the first time. General deterrence, on the other hand, refers to how the state’s punishment of offenders is projected to the public who has not yet committed a crime. In this particular type of deterrence, the state instills fear of punishment in the public, which in theory prevents them from committing crime (Akers, 16).
Though, the retribution will never take the brutal behavior of the offender, it does serve for pleasing society’s need for restoring moral order, as retaliation would be required if punishment was not executed. It is morally the right thing to do. Though, the cost can be high, but with the right method, we can ensure fear in the public for committing such atrocious crime. Deterrence is a rational technique of disappointing individuals from committing crimes by frightening possible criminals throughout the existence that there would be strict penalties for their criminal engagements, such as being captive. People can be reasonable, and it's simply wise to accept that individuals would reevaluate the temptations of illegal activity if the results and cruelty of the punishment would be predictable.