On Punishment This article was originally posted on the Click-L mailing list. It is reprinted here with the author's permission. If you go back over the years, in my posts I talk primarily about positive reinforcement. There are occasions where I have used other procedures.
Felony and Misdemeanor A principle often mentioned with respect to the degree of punishment to be meted out is that the punishment should match the crime. Measurements of the degree of seriousness of a crime have been developed. Criminal justice There are many possible reasons that might be given to justify or explain why someone ought to be punished; here follows a broad outline of typical, possibly conflicting, justifications.
Deterrence prevention [ edit ] One reason given to justify punishment  is that it is a measure to prevent people from committing an offence - deterring previous offenders from re-offending, and preventing those who may be contemplating an offence they have not committed from actually committing it.
This punishment is intended to be sufficient that people would choose not to commit the crime rather than experience the punishment. The aim is to deter everyone in the community from committing offences. Some criminologists state that the number of people convicted for crime does not decrease as a result of more severe punishment and conclude that deterrence is ineffective.
These criminologists therefore argue that lack of deterring effect of increasing the sentences for already severely punished crimes say nothing about the significance of the existence of punishment as a deterring factor.
These criminologists argue that the use of statistics to gauge the efficiency of crime fighting methods are a danger of creating a reward hack that makes the least efficient criminal justice systems appear to be best at fighting crime, and that the appearance of deterrance being ineffective may be an example of this.
Rehabilitation penology Some punishment includes work to reform and rehabilitate the culprit so Is punishment always the right solutions they will not commit the offence again. Imprisonment separates offenders from the community, removing or reducing their ability to carry out certain crimes. The death penalty does this in a permanent and irrevocable way.
In some societies, people who stole have been punished by having their hands amputated. Retributive justice Criminal activities typically give a benefit to the offender and a loss to the victim.
Punishment has been justified as a measure of retributive justice in which the goal is to try to rebalance any unjust advantage gained by ensuring that the offender also suffers a loss. Sometimes viewed as a way of "getting even" with a wrongdoer—the suffering of the wrongdoer is seen as a desired goal in itself, even if it has no restorative benefits for the victim.
One reason societies have administered punishments is to diminish the perceived need for retaliatory "street justice", blood feudand vigilantism. Restorative justice For minor offenses, punishment may take the form of the offender "righting the wrong", or making restitution to the victim.
Community service or compensation orders are examples of this sort of penalty. Punishment can serve as a means for society to publicly express denunciation of an action as being criminal.
Besides educating people regarding what is not acceptable behavior, it serves the dual function of preventing vigilante justice by acknowledging public anger, while concurrently deterring future criminal activity by stigmatizing the offender. This is sometimes called the "Expressive Theory" of denunciation.
The critics argue that some individuals spending time and energy and taking risks in punishing others, and the possible loss of the punished group members, would have been selected against if punishment served no function other than signals that could evolve to work by less risky means.
Instead of punishment requiring we choose between them, unified theorists argue that they work together as part of some wider goal such as the protection of rights. Detractors argue that punishment is simply wrong, of the same design as " two wrongs make a right ".
Critics argue that punishment is simply revenge. Retribution, Crime Prevention, and the Law, states in her book that, We ought not to impose such harm on anyone unless we have a very good reason for doing so.
This remark may seem trivially true, but the history of humankind is littered with examples of the deliberate infliction of harm by well-intentioned persons in the vain pursuit of ends which that harm did not further, or in the successful pursuit of questionable ends.
These benefactors of humanity sacrificed their fellows to appease mythical gods and tortured them to save their souls from a mythical hell, broke and bound the feet of children to promote their eventual marriageability, beat slow schoolchildren to promote learning and respect for teachers, subjected the sick to leeches to rid them of excess blood, and put suspects to the rack and the thumbscrew in the service of truth.
They schooled themselves to feel no pity—to renounce human compassion in the service of a higher end. The deliberate doing of harm in the mistaken belief that it promotes some greater good is the essence of tragedy.
We would do well to ask whether the goods we seek in harming offenders are worthwhile, and whether the means we choose will indeed secure them. But these are only the minimum harms, suffered by the least vulnerable inmates in the best-run prisons.
Most prisons are run badly, and in some, conditions are more squalid than in the worst of slums. In the District of Columbia jail, for example, inmates must wash their clothes and sheets in cell toilets because the laundry machines are broken.
Vermin and insects infest the building, in which air vents are clogged with decades' accumulation of dust and grime.
But even inmates in prisons where conditions are sanitary must still face the numbing boredom and emptiness of prison life—a vast desert of wasted days in which little in the way of meaningful activity is possible. Advocates of this viewpoint argue that such suppression of intention causes the harmful behaviors to remain, making punishment counterproductive.
These people suggest that the ability to make intentional choices should instead be treasured as a source of possibilities of betterment, citing that complex cognition would have been an evolutionarily useless waste of energy if it led to justifications of fixed actions and no change as simple inability to understand arguments would have been the most thrifty protection from being misled by them if arguments were for social manipulation, and reject condemnation of people who intentionally did bad things.
However, punishment does not necessarily cause an employee to demonstrate a desirable behavior.Punishment has its place—but our ability to rise above our baser instincts and judge each situation objectively, and with an eye toward fairness, is one of the highest achievements of humanity.
According to Thomson, the right to life is always stronger than the right to do as one chooses with one's own body. False The conclusion of the traditional pro-life argument is that abortion is wrong.
Prison is a convenience. The best "punishment" is education and psychological work with some kind of confinement. Boyer Pierre, France. Let's be honest: voters like prisons. Prison is an easy solution to the problem of crime and doesn_t require much thought.
The last. incapacitation. seeks to protect society at big from felons. This essay will analyze whether penalty is ever the right solution to halt offense. in visible radiation of the grounds for serving out penalty to felons.
From the position of justness. penalty is the right solution to halt offense. as justness must be upheld in society. Punishment for wrongdoing must always be justified. It is the infliction of harm on another person, done deliberately, in response to an illegal action.
Morality dictates that to punish someone. Detractors argue that punishment is simply wrong, of the same design as "two wrongs make a right". Critics argue that punishment is simply revenge. Professor Deirdre Golash, author of the book, The Case against Punishment: Retribution, Crime Prevention, and the Law, states in her book that.