There are many approaches to dealing with crime. There are preventive methods that seek to prevent a crime from happening. There is also a punitive method of preventing crime that work by making the penalty for committing a crime very high. It prevents people from committing a crime and offenders from repeating the crime. This research seeks to establish whether making the penalty stiff will work in repeating repeat and future offenders.
The relationship between crime and intention To begin with, this paper will investigate the Crime and the different reasons why they are committed and whether or not those who commit certain crimes with good intentions are blameless or not. In order to determine if a crime is acceptable in certain situations or not the term “crime” has to be defined and the different motives why people commit crimes have to be clarified. Most people’s understanding of a crime is that it is an action punishable by society. According to Oxford dictionary, crime is “an action or omission which constitutes an offence and is punishable by law.” Although this is the most common and generally accepted definition, there are many ambiguities regarding what it is that defines an action that is punishable. Who determines what actions are punishable and what actions are not?
The highest level, a crime is considered to be a “Felony”, at the mid-range they are referred to as a “Misdemeanor”, and on the lowest end, they are called an “Infraction.” Certain people have different perspectives on a crimes impact on society, and can be biased depending on the individual; among these many views, three are directly connected to the crime itself. The first view is from the men and women sworn to protect society, and uphold its laws. Law enforcement is a very diverse profession, and within it comes many different people with many different views. However, when the uniform goes on, all prejudices, and biased opinions should be thrown out the window. This isn’t always the case though , depending on the person they might be dealing with, and the level of crime committed, law enforcement may have a different outlook on the situation at hand.
State and Federal objectives of punishment Today punishment is the most dominant correctional goal of both the state and federal government in response to criminality. The purpose of punishment is to protect society, rehabilitate criminal offenders, and reduce recidivism. In both the state and federal correctional institutions, their objectives are to use punishment as form deterrence while incapacitating and, rehabilitating offenders. For punishment to be successful it must be so unpleasant that it will hopefully deter inmates from reverting to such life and also deter others from taking part in such activities. In response to the growing public concern over criminality, politicians have adopted a Tough on Crime approach when dealing with law breakers, and have pushed for new legislation to keep criminal offenders from further harming or terrorizing society.
Criminology is the study of why individuals engage or commit crimes and the reasons as to why they behave in certain ways in different situations (Hagan, 2010). Through understanding the reasons or why an individual commits a crime, one can come up with ways to prevent and control crime or rehabilitate criminals. There exist a large number of criminology theories, some link crime to an individual or person; they believe a person weighs the cons and pros and makes a conscious decision on whether to commit or not commit a felony. Others see the society as having a duty to make sure that its members do not engage in criminal acts by providing a secure and safe living place. Some claim that some people have hidden or dormant characteristics that determine their reaction or behavior when confronted or put in particular negative conditions (Akers & Sellers, 2012).
(Crime control model) This paper will compare and contrast the role that the due process and crime control models have on shaping criminal procedure policy. Some of the differences between the due process model and the crime control model are in the due process model people that are arrested are perceived to be innocent until proven in a court of law. The crime control model believes that the people that are arrested are guilty and need to be punished by the government. Another difference with both models is the due process model believes that policing within the criminal justice system is essential to maintaining justice within society. The crime control model believes that the arresting of people in the criminal justice system has a negative effect and slows down the process of the criminal justice system.
Introduction With the society that most individuals are offered today, the world of crime has been constantly transforming. This can influence the typical individual to question if there are too many laws that one should follow, including the penalties that are to be expected. The word crime can insinuate many thoughts of apprehension, segregation, and security when applying the law in accordance to criminal acts being prosecuted. In order for penalties to apply to a particular individual, law enforcement must first be able to track and identify suspects of various crimes. Numerous approaches can be offered for this process, but profiling is a common tactic that has aided law enforcement in seeking justice for both suspects and victims.
The Federal Sentencing Guidelines are standards that specify a stable sentencing strategy for persons and associations charged with felonies and severe misdemeanors in the United States federal courts system. The states courts handle the sentencing for their criminals, but if the crime is too serious, the case is brought to the Federal Courts. Usually, the federal courts give a tougher sentence to a criminal defendant than the states court. Most federal judges follow the Federal Sentencing Guidelines, but the state judges tend to use their own techniques to give a sentence. But there is no telling if the Federal Sentencing Guidelines can accurately sentence defendants because every criminal is different.
The first advantage is because as we know that crimes and criminals comes in all types of size, shape, gender, and reasoning but the issue is that many of those who commit the crime not always fit the norm. With that said as b... ... middle of paper ... ...arities depending on the crime or a copycat but there is always some tiny clue that cause a difference in person’s action so if one relies on criminal profiling to resolve a crime it can lead to the blame of a possible innocent person. In conclusion I would say that though there are pros and cons with criminal profiling it is a time sensitive method of solving crimes that may need a closer. As a whole I am a one who thinks that if there was no criminal profiling there would not be bases on what the passion was for the crime or what type of individual would commit the crime. I can see how a bias opinion can affect the results regarding the validity of this method or the liability but there is a great benefit as it holds at least a starting point to solve a crime and take a criminal off the streets eventually before they may strike again either now or later in life.
It’s set up to manage the person and crime that was violated. They deal in managing of crimes the law enforcement agencies exists because they are structured and base on ideas, and concerns from the community. These agencies are the police, the courts, and corrections. These agencies are divided, because when the founding fathers did not one get more powerful than the other and should all be balance. The limits of government power, duties, and also rights of individuals which is the Constitutional Law.