There have been many research studies conducted in the past to measure punitiveness. Through public, professionals and students, different methods have been used and there are varieties of definition of such. Punitiveness is an adjective that comes from the word “punitive” which means “inflicting punishment” or “intended to punish someone or something” (Falco, 2008). As what Courtney and Mackey (2004), defines punitivenes, as “an attitude toward sanctioning and punishment that includes retribution, incapacitation, and lack of concern for rehabilitation”. Meaning, those people who support for the purpose of retribution, deterrence and incapacitation are more punitive than those who believe that the primary goal of punishment is restoration and rehabilitation. On the other hand, punitiveness is “a public support from crime control policies that increase the level of punishment for individual offenders” (Unnever and Cullen, 2009). Thus, crime control policies like support for death penalty can increase each of the individual’s level of punitiveness. In addition, punitiveness is not as simple as being punitive and not punitive; it is a “fluid” concept that is ongoing on different situations with certain individuals (Sprott, 1999). Furthermore, to …show more content…
Another study shows that, education and punitiveness has an indirect relationship through: liberalism and fear of crime. Therefore, those respondents with higher educational attainment are less to support government policies and more likely to support punitive policies. However, higher level of education respondents is less to fear crime and less to support punitive policies (Langworthy and Whitehead , 1986). In both Courtright and Mackey (20000) and Farnworth et al. (1998) undergraduate students in the senior year are less punitive than freshmen
Increased tensions during the 1960s in the context of the Civil Rights Movement started to cause an increase in crime, sparking a newfound belief in incarcerating the masses to prevent more crime from occurring. During the 1970s, the likelihood of being incarcerated increased for nearly every citizen, especially low-level offenders. Clear and Frost thoroughly explain that the Punishment Imperative in the 1980s was caused by changes in government “policies and practices associated with the increasingly ubiquitous War on Drugs” (31). Changes in sentencing guidelines, mandatory minimum sentences, and three strikes legislation were though to be initially helpful in decreasing the rate of incarceration, but they proved to do the exact opposite. Policies also regarding reentry into society, access to education, public housing, and child custody for ex-convicts continued to play a major role in the increase in incarceration because newly released convicts had an extremely difficult time reintegrating into society. Clear and Frost continue to argue their point as they reach incapacitation in the 1990s, where they discuss how the government focused generally on increasing the lengths of stay within prisons instead of increasing the amount of people being incarcerated. Clear and Frost use quantitative data to explain the government policy called
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
Victor Rios states in his well-renowned book Punished, “In 1924, sociologist Edwin Sutherland discussed how boys were taught to be “rough and tough”, rendering them more likely than girls to become delinquent.” (Rios, 2011, p. 131) This quotation alone means that for almost 100 years, if not longer, boys have had a criminality stigma attached to them just because of their gender. Not only is it completely out of anybody’s control to pick their gender, it is also extremely sexist to say that boys are more likely than girls to become deviant in behavior. There are numerous statistics that prove how men are more often targeted than women when it comes to criminal acts, as well as how they are perceived to be more violent and less likely to comply
Hessick, C. (2010). Race and Gender as Explicit Sentencing Factors. Journal Of Gender, Race &
The criminal justice system main focus has always been shifted towards male offenders and their responses to male crimes. Women and girls offending lacked attention simply because most crimes were known to be committed by males and not females. Nevertheless, towards the end of the 20th century, female incarceration tremendously took a turn for the worst, leading to more study on women/girls, women and crime offending, crimes, and the criminal justice system in regard to feminist. This increase rate of women incarceration was led in regard to “war on drugs”. It was explained that women’s and girl’s crime and deviance is trigger often by biological factors than by social or economic forces (Daly & Chesney-Lind, 1988). In the late 1960s, Bertrand
“The Effect of Education on Crime: Evidence from Prison Inmates, Arrests, and Self-Reports.” UC Los Angeles: Lochner, Lance; & Moretti, Enrico. (2002). California Center for Population Research.
For every crime, the offense and charge are different. In addition, not every crime is committed by the same gender. Crimes such as larceny, fraud, forgery, and prostitution (Chesney-Lind, 1986) tend to be committed more often by women; whereas, assault, murder, trafficking, etc tend to be committed by men. When it comes to the stereotyping of women in the criminal justice system, one could say that women present themselves as victims to reach a lesser sentence or that by presenting themselves as victims they will have a longer sentence that will protect them. 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).
Each state is responsible for controlling crime. One area many states wanted to focus their efforts to combat crime was against violent offenders. In the 1980s, States enacted tougher punishments for violent offenders in efforts to lessen the disparity among sentences. These efforts included mandatory minimum sentences and Truth-in-sentencing. In 1994, the Violent Crime Cont...
Men represent eight hundred ninety-six out of every one hundred thousand prison inmates, while women represent only fifty-six out of one hundred thousand. The rates have increased eight hundred percent since the war on drugs was initiated. Even among women prisoners, racial disparities are glaring. Hispanic and African American women have astronomically higher chances of incarceration than white women. Women are also more likely to be arrested for drug and economic crimes, such as possession or embezzlement (McGrath, 10/29). According to the chivalry hypothesis, the low rates of prosecuted female offenders reflect the leniency with which law enforcement treats women offenders (McGrath, 10/29). Gender differences in aggression and empathy play into the public perception of the ideal offender, and women do not fit the profile. Rather than applying the law equally across genders, police buy into the socially constructed view of women: meek, gentle, caring, empathic, and definitely not capable of cruel criminality (McGrath,
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...
Crime and Gender, The great majority of crimes are committed by men, although the United States has the highest female arrest and conviction rate in the world. The gender gap may be influenced by the “chivalry effect” in which male police officers and judges see women’s crimes as less threatening and let them off with a warning. On the other hand, women who belong to stigmatized groups, and women whose behavior challenges gender norms, may be punished more harshly. Some criminologists argue that men’s higher levels of testosterone explain their higher crime rates, but this argument does not account for differences in crime rates by social class. Sociologists argue that the culture of working class masculinity explains why these men are so likely
Traditionally, there has been little research on or interest in the impact of female crime in modern society. In addition, juvenile crime rates are on the rise, which combine for a void of research or information on female juvenile offenders. In general, crime rates for women offenders have risen since the 1990's. Increasing numbers of young women are also offending at higher rates. In a 1996 U.S. Department of Justice Report, the number of arrests of young women had doubled between 1989 and 1993. Twenty percent of all juvenile arrests were committed by girls, an increase of 87 percent. However, according to The National Study of Delinquency Prevention in Schools, males are far more likely to admit to criminal involvement than are females. For example, 12 percent of males and 4 percent of females reported carrying a hidden weapon other than a pocketknife in the past year (Wilson, p.150). There are several theories for this rise in crime proposed by modern feminists, including that the introduction of women into traditional male roles prompted women to commit increasingly dangerous and violent crimes. However, this paper will rely on Meda Chesney-Lind's theories from The Female Offender.
There are several types of punishment that can be inflicted upon an offender including, fines, community sanctions and imprisonment (The Judicial Conference of Australia, 2007). Punishment is described as a sanction which inflicts a certain amount of pain and loss on the offender, used for payback and deter (The Judicial Conference of Australia, 2007; Carlsmith, Darley, & Robinson, 2002). There are three ways society justifies punishing offenders, through the
Crime and criminalization can be ambiguous; crime is only crime until certain authorities deem the actions illegal. However, social inequalities can lead to increased crime rates, notions such as gender, age, race, and class influence crime and provide criminologist with the date to determine who is most likely to commit a crime and where.
they? - do two wrongs make a right?) but why is it so important that