Cjs/220 Compare And Contrast The Four Punishment Philosophies

567 Words3 Pages
Punishment Philosophy Paper Bridgett Tolley CJS/220 February 19, 2012 Ronald Ramsey “As soon as men know that they can kill without fear of punishment or blame, they kill; or at least they encourage killers with approving smiles.” - Simone Weil In the United States’ criminal justice system, the application of justice occurs within its courts. Society cannot maintain order without some form of punishment for those who break common laws. When one person encroaches on another the criminal justice system works to achieve justice for the victimized individual. Not attempting to punish the transgressor is considered, on some level, the equivalent of punishing the victim. Some dispute, however, remains concerning whether legal punishment, regardless of the type, is also a form of injustice. Punishment philosophies attempt to protect the interests of both victims and criminals as well as adhere to relevant Amendment restrictions.…show more content…
The consensus is that the punishment should fit the crime, but never exceed it. Punishment philosophies address the courts’ responsibility in ordering sanctions as well as the methods by which these sanctions are administered. According to Meyer and Grant (2003), the four punishment philosophies are retribution, incapacitation, deterrence, rehabilitation, and restoration. Recently, the concept of punishment was that of deterrence (stopping crimes, and teaching about consequences) and rehabilitation (changing a criminal’s behavior); however, the focus, now, is on incapacitation (confinement to prevent future crimes) and retribution (punishing an illegal act). In the end, however, all or none of the preceding theories may aid in the fifth possible philosophy, restoration (making the victim
Open Document