The results, of the crime control model are wrongful convictions, being over-turned and this is a major downfall in the criminal justice system. On the other hand the due process model is more concerned with the structure and the efficiency of the law. The due process focuses on evidences and facts in a case and ensures that a person in innocent until proven guilty in the court of law. In addition the due process model goal is the prevention and the elimination of crimes within the criminal justice
Prison time is an effective deterrent to a point, with some people more time is needed. Prosecutors should have the option of using a variety of punishments in order to minimize crime. The most fundamental principle of justice is that the punishment should fit the crime. When someone plans and brutally murders another person, it would seem that justice would be better served if they too were killed as they had planned to kill another human being. Our justice system shows more sympathy for criminals than it does victims and this should be altered.
When you are convicted of a crime, you are no longer a member of society; therefore, you have no rights". Which most people would think the same thing as this blogger, the only time it is legally correct and should be allowed to take away gun control from citizens is if entering jail, or have a criminal
In some states, the individual must be convicted of two serious felonies for the three strikes law to apply, while in others any felonies count towards the third strike. Critics of the three strike law express many strong arguments against their harsh legal statute. Our society has ultimately had an issue with the three strikes law. Some people have said that the law “destroys the flexibility of the courts and the judge, it is unjust in certain conditions, and it adds more criminals to an already crowded and expensive criminal system”
The death penalty is our harshest punishment. ... Further, maldistribution inheres no more in capital punishment than in any other punishment. ... Many nondecisive issues are associated with capital punishment. ... We cannot know whether the murderer on death row suffers more than his victim suffered; however, unlike the murderer, the victim deserved none of the suffering inflicted.
Even though some may argue that death penalty deters crime, studies have shown that it does not. On the contrary, death penalty increases the murder rate since it causes the death of still another person. Execution cost taxpayers more than keeping someone in prison for life. Isolating
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. Information in this article also supports my argument that mandatory laws violate the Constitution. Taking power away from judges is a violation of the 10th amendment “separation of powers.” As a result, our prison population has quadrupled and is filled with the wrong people. Mandatory sentencing applies so broadly that they sweep minor criminals and drug users along with the major ones, “drug kingpins,” who are the real targets of the statutes. Bender, David L. “America’s Prisons Opposing Viewpoints”4thed.Minnesota.
In contrast to Scalia I think he has good points but he needs a better argument than the judical system has faults. Scalia is for the death penalty. She thinks about the victims in the crimes. She agrees that there is a lot of pian done to the victims however she is not considering all the pain the prisoners will go threw also. This “cocktail” is not just a shot and that’s it, she should know that already.
And they chose not to tell anyone of Matthew's whereabouts. Every punch, every kick, every action was the result of some decision. And even if every decision was made “in the moment” it still does not relieve the killers of their moral and legal culpability. Their sentencing was well deserved, and will probably never be freemen again. "The Laramie Project" tells the story in a journalistic manner, since it is assembled from real interviews and court testimonies.
I think the primary goal should be incapacitation. Basically, no one really end up in prison on a first offense, unless it's a particularly big one. Most prisoners have many less severe priors on their record. They've demonstrated the willingness to victimize innocent folks again and again. For that, they need to be removed from society for the society's good.