In the 17th and 18th century, the purpose of punishment in society was to seek revenge and retribution for the crimes, however, in the 18th century classicist criminology thinking emerged in response to the cruel punishments that were handed out. The two key leaders of this was Beccaria and Bentham, both of which were utilitarian, so believed the reductivist approach to punishment would be the most effective. Beccaria argued that the purpose of punishment was to make society associate a strong link between the crime and punishment so they knew the consequences of their actions (Easten, S. and Piper, C,. 2012), he argued this could be done by delivering the punishment as quickly as possible and believed that the certainty of punishment in society would be the most effective way of deterrence (Newburn, T. 2007). 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.
The theory of deterrence aims to prevent offenders from repeating the crime that they have been convicted of. Sanctions wit... ... middle of paper ... ...e and proportionate to the seriousness of the offence that has been committed. That each case should be judged on the individual aggravating and mitigating factors associated with the offence and on the other individual details of the offence. The circumstances of the offender and the harm caused to the victim of the offence or to the community should have an impact on the severity of the punishment that the offender will receive. It is therefore accurate to say that punishment should be commensurate with the seriousness of the crime.
In terms of punishment, Durkheim saw the criminal law and the punishment system as a way for society to express its rules and values. This meant that moral boundaries were outlined and sustained through the assertion of penalties for crimes. Durkheim sees the role of law and punishment to be important for the solidarity of society as a whole. (Ibid., p81) Here, society has a... ... middle of paper ... ...decrease or work to control crime. (Garland, 1990, p23-6) Durkheim sees punishment as a social institution, which is first and last a matter of morality and social solidarity.
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.
Retribution is a method to punish that stresses vengeance or payback for the crime as the suitable goal. Incapacitation is a method to punish that seeks to defend society from criminals by imprisoning or executing them. Finally, rehabilitation is an approach to punish that tries to reform criminals as part of their penalty. Positive deviance discusses to actions well-thought-out deviant inside a given situation, but which are later reinterpreted as suitable. And this can result in a change of the social norms in a culture for the better.