Similarly, direct action by a person who has no special authority is not properly called punishment, and is more likely to be revenge or an act of hostility.” http://www.sagepub.com/upm-data/5144_Banks_II_Proof_Chapter_5.pdf When using a theoretical approach to the question of why we punish criminals, the same source raises the issues of: • They deserve to be punished. • Punishment will stop them from committing further crimes. • Punishment tells the victim that society disapproves of the harm that he or she has suffered. • Punishment discourages others from doing the same thing. • Punishment protects society from dangerous or dishonest people.
If that person values his/her life, he/she should not take another person’s life. The idealism “eye for an eye” works in this topic. Without penalty, our justice system is a failure. It would fail to bring justice to the victims who died because of these murderers. Our justice system is built to justly punish and bring justice to victims.
V saved Evey and was explaining her how he could have killed those fingerman. V also seems to be a very rancorous person and is trying to transmit this to Evey to make her understand that violence is not just about killing, but is a justice punishment for wrongdoing. V’s behavior is pretty much making Evey loose innocence and realize how unjust the world can be. Sometimes you have to get hurt for the second or even third time to realize that you are just an innocent person who has to start changing your point of view. Evey is one of these people.
Sometimes a punishment is related to your transgression, and other times it has nothing to do with it. None the less there is a common goal, and that is to deter you from breaking the rules. It really shouldn’t matter what the punishment is just as long as it brings about a desirable result. Certainly the same must be true for our criminal justice system; it’s not advantageous for us as a society for the system to be in place strictly to hold us accountable for our actions. Take the death penalty for example, it is the old eye for an eye concept, kill and be killed.
Criminal Acts and Choice Theories Response The basis of the “choice theory” is to show why and/or what causes a criminal to make the choice to commit a crime. Every person has to make their own choices and decisions and criminals make irrational decisions when, where, and how to commit a crime. All the while giving no thought to the punishments for their actions because the personal gain is of greater value to them. Criminals do not believe the laws apply to them. The criminal commit crimes for personal gain, money, power, and status.
A rule that does so little to protect the law as it was made. The exclusionary rule allows criminals to go because evidence was illegally obtained, but what about the victims of the crimes. It is almost a turntable and they have become a victim for a second time. I am going to discuss the three main reasons why we as citizens should get rid of the rule. One is the releasing the guilty back into society, next is the slowing down of the criminal process and the last thing is the behavior and consequence of the police officers involved in the cases.
Like the item says, 'functionalist sociologists focus on how far individuals accept the norms and values of society.' Durkheim blames people not being fully integrated into society’s norms and values as to why they commit crime. So he said once people have served their time for their crime, they should be reintegrated. It’s a strength that Durkheim suggests them being reintegrated as it means they’re less likely to reoffend if they feel they belong to their society and do not look for status through crime. However, interactionists would say that agents of social control cause crime, not the society you are in.
Opponents of capital punishment say it has no deterrent effect on crime, wrongly gives governments the power to take human life, and spreads social injustices by disproportionately targeting people of color (racist) and people who cannot afford good attorneys (classist). They say lifetime jail sentences are a more severe and less expensive punishment than death. .Pro Death-Penalty "If we execute murderers and there is in fact no deterrent effect, we have killed
But is it right to take away someone’s ability to vote for how they should live? People should have a voice, no matter who they are and what they have done with their lives. Whether that voice should be taken into account is up for investigation. Certain prisoner’s should be able to keep their right to vote, depending on the gravity of their crime. First of all, if the crime is as terrible as murder, and it was fully intentional, the privilege should be fully stripped.
Government officials, politicians, and courts employees have concluded that individuals commit crimes for private alternatives and they should be punished and held responsible for their actions and conduct. Criminals also have the concept that they will never be caught thus they will continue commit crimes until proven otherwise. Large amounts of criminal who have committed offenses do not think about the consequences of their action (Brown, 2007). Today’s society has determined that the root of why an individual would choose to commit crimes is steam from the lack of education and impoverished backgrounds (Brown, 2007). To do wrong and commit crime is a choice of the criminal.