Crime maybe controlled by fear of punishment 4. Punishment that is severe, certain, and swift will stop crime They believed in fast punishment instead of long trials. One of the major parts of criminal punishment reform was for fair and equal treatment of accused offenders. Judges could punish criminals however they wanted to no matter how severe the crime. Mr. Beccaria and other members of the Classical School fought for punishment to be set by legislative instead of judges having all of the authority for punishment.
According to Packers theory, the crime control model also leans more toward the idea that the costs associated with providing criminals “rights” are wasteful and would be better applied towards building new prisons and hiring more police officers (Packer, 1968). Under the due process model, law enforcement roles are dramatically reduced as this model leans more towards the constitutional rights of criminals and reduces the amount of officers in a given area. The attention here is put towards spending the money to rehabilitate the offenders instead of towards the hiring of more officers and building more prisons. What roles do the prosecutor and courts play? The crime control model is thought of as the “conveyor belt” of justice.
However, the question really begs whether or not the law of murder is in need of a reform in situations where one or both of its fundamental elements are absent? The conviction upon murder is a mandatory life sentence in prison. The judge passing this sentence upon the conviction of murder cannot pass a lesser sentence no matter how mitigating it might be. Therefore, the notion for a reform in the law of murders has become increasingly significant and relevant to the legal framework that confines our modern society in cases of voluntary manslaughter, mercy killings and euthanasia. Criticisms on the existing law of murder has certainly not abated in recent times.
He is very experienced in criminal law and is against mandatory sentencing. This journal presents information that the mandatory sentencing policy in the U.S. is a failure. It argues that Legislators thought that they could “get tough on crime,” especially drug crime. I feel this source gives educated reasons as to why drug policy needs to be changed. It also backs up my other sources with the same research results; by removing the sentencing discretion of judges, and replacing it with mandatory jail sentences, we are sending more offenders to prison instead of programs designed to rehabilitate.
Should we adhere to the policy of “an eye for an eye”? Opponents of the Death Penalty, in their attempt to illustrate that executing a convicted criminal is no less barbaric than the crime for which he or she is being punished, claim that sentencing these individuals to death does not deter crime. In fact, such executions merely convey that it is acceptable to act violently. In her argument against Capital Punishment, Belinda York states, “Why should potential criminals be afraid of committing crimes, when the very society that prohibits such behavior resorts to the same methods” (89)? According to this view, if the state is allowed to kill, why is not this privilege extended to all citizens?
Mia Michael H.English Mrs. Gaskill April 23, 2013 An argument that never seems to have a clear winner is “Life in Prison” vs. “The Death Penalty”. Although both sides have valid points, I feel that only one should be allowed. The death penalty is inhumane and unethical. It seems hypocritical for us, the American people, and are judicial system to say that murder is wrong and illegal, but continue to murder both the guilty and thee wrongfully accused. The death penalty gives those that are actually guilty the easy way out of punishment, and the innocent a wrongful death.
Another important issue surrounding the death penalty is the notion of cruel and unusual punishment. Touching the subject of the death penalty, proponents argue that capital punishment is less costly to the tax payer than incarceration for life although literature shows otherwise. Because of the length of time death row inmates spend on legal procedures, sometimes they become senior citizens before their sentence is carried out (Gerard, 2005). This literature review will establish why the subject of the death penalty in the United States is a salient issue and discuss the validity of the reviewed articles. It is important to investigate the death penalty in the United States because of the United States’ perceived
Should the Death Penalty Exists in Modern day Society(USA)? by Nicholas Checketts The death penalty, in the USA, is the most inhuman and crucial punishment. Even though it is not applied in every state, the death penalty is a very strong debate and argument within the US government. There are people who support it and those who are against it. The death penalty is a punishment to those who due to their actions and circumstances commit crimes.
For example, he feels people who break the law should be punished accordingly and not necessarily be locked-up and behind bars. Another point presented by the author is how United States citizens have to rectify and acquit oneself in order to be punished and imprisoned for their wrongdoings. Kevin Carr feels that people should not be restrained and confined behind steel bars. Despite the previous arguments, another reason Kevin strongly feels that “criminals convicted of non-violet crimes” should not face jail terms is because it can leave a psychological affect on people who are not a threat or danger to others. In other words, offenders that find themselves incarcerated for a small case such as being a thief, a beggar, or being a violator for parking infractions should not be labeled and put in the same classification as people who are convicted of repulsive, despicable, and inhuman types of criminal violence.
How to deal with prisoners is a hot issue of debate in psychological and sociological circles all around the world. Should prison life be of hardship to discipline the prisoners or should it be void of hardships to help prisoners appreciate the bright aspects of life? One viewpoint widely held is that the amount of hardship prisoners are exposed to should be consonant with crime they have perpetrated. I tend to agree with this widely established opinion because of two outstanding reasons. First of all, when criminals are treated differently based on the seriousness of the crimes they have committed they come to realize the meaning of fairness and the fact that fairness has an indispensable role in the judiciary and punitive system.