According to John R. Schafer, he argues that “strictly enforced three strikes laws are an effective crime control policy and may break the cycle of crime for youthful offender” (Schafer, 1999). However on the other hand Attorney Michael Vitiello states that “the three strikes laws have not delivered on their promises to reduce serious crime. Moreover, the costs of such laws appear to outweigh their benefits” (Vitiello, 2002). First the deterrent effect of the three strikes laws is that it keeps repeat offenders in prison for a long time. After a person’s second conviction if they do not refrain from criminal activity the person will receive their third strike.
This is flawed mainly because it seems to assume that showing people that what they've done is wrong will always accomplish something, that punishing those who commit crimes will deter others from following the same pattern. The problem with prison is that prisons are not a place of rehabilitation. There are people who steal and sell drugs simply because they have no other means of survival. There are people whose lives in the outside world are so terribly difficult that for them, that prison life is a cushier existence than their ordinary day-to-day existence, and many of these people intentionally commit crimes so they will be arrested and thrown in jail, simply so that they can get a decent meal and a bed. These people are then introduced to major offenders, who have not been rehabilitated and become worse than their "mentors."
Carl Hart talks about the negative effects of the criminal justice systems and how programs such as restorative justice has a more positive effect. He speaks about data that shows criminal justice is not the best way to deal with these types of offense because they are not trained educators or counselors; they are trained to minimize damage and dole out punishment. On the other hand, officials in restorative justice are trained educators and counselors and our better prepared to help drug offenders. Another negative effect of the criminal justice system is the cost to incarcerate an individual. Putting someone in prison cost a numerous amount of money and restorative justice is by for a cheaper option.
Also, they view imprisonment as a deterrent against future crimes. For example, if a law-breaker sees his friend imprisoned for a crime he committed, then the other party will be less willing to break the law and end up in prison as well. Furthermore, punishment itself would satisfy most of society when the criminal is imprisoned. Prison offers law-breakers a chance to receive drug treatment, educational benefits, and as stated before, a chance at rehabilitation. Also, incarceration costs less than leaving criminals out of prisons because the cost of housing inmates is less than the cost of their crimes incur.
Today, the legal teams representing criminals on death row usually try to stall the execution as long as they can. Referring to the criminals, Pojman says, “they fear death more than life in prison” (Pojman 142). Once a criminal is locked up, their freedom is lost, but it is still not as extreme as losing their life to the death penalty. In prison, criminals are still living and breathing; they can get out on parole and wait until the day they are able to leave and live freely. Proponents believe that killing these criminals will reduce crime and make sure that the criminals will never commit a monstrous crime again.
This is why when they are caught for committing these felonies and arrested, throwing them in jail is completely pointless. For one, what exactly will a few months or years do to these offenders? The sentence will most certainly not cure them of their addiction. Drug users pose major crime threats by robbing and stealing to support their habits, but treatment provides a greater potential than incarceration for dealing with the underlying addiction that drives t... ... middle of paper ... ... of Rehabilitation: Promises and Perils of Drug Courts.? es1/nij/181412.pdf>.
For instance, an alleged criminal suspected of a crime has been convicted and this reinforces the views that the system can protect and serve the community. Society admires the idea of convicting people rather than letting them into the society again and risking the danger that can happen. In many cases, officers and prosecutors will use their power to arrest and indict the person that best fits the description of the suspect of the crime. Therefore, the alleged criminal will most likely be convicted based on the description and circumstances of the individual. However, this plainly shows that the system fails to aid the innocent who were merely in the wrong place at the wrong
Although many claim that the death penalty is reasonable punishment for murderer saying "an eye for an eye", and arguing " the punishment must fit the crime", this simply is an act of talking away the last right of humans. The statement itself is a contradiction. If "an eye for an eye" was equally applied to every crime, it could be seen as reasonable. But people who stole something go to jail for a little while for what they do. Instead of we stealing something back from theirs and let them go, we put them in a jail and let them do their parts.
It is the the duty of the government to provide security for all individuals. Therefore, it is only a necessity, but also an obligation to get rid of those who impose threat or harm to any individual. Capital punishment is not always the most appropriate solution, but given the circumstances, it may be the most effective way to deal with criminals who threaten society. First of all, capital punishment would reduce taxes and makes prisons a much more effective place to hold criminals. This causes life imprisonment to become practically obsolete and prisons will be capable of functioning as a rehabilitation center.
This is because death is so much more feared than the mere restrictions on one's... ... middle of paper ... ...s and criminals are not dealt with fairly? Capital punishment is justified because there won’t be worries about the state paying for criminals’ lifetime in jail, it will provide retribution and condemnation, and crime and murder rates will decrease. Using capital punishment prevents many unnecessary deaths and crimes. If we no longer use it deaths and crimes will increase, due to the fact that the consequences are not severe enough to make the criminal think before they act. Capital punishment is justified!