During the sentencing phase there are four objectives that are considered such as deterrence, rehabilitation, incapacitation, and retribution. What is the purpose of these objectives and are they effective? The purpose of deterrence is to convince the public that committing crimes would result in certain punishments. The use of deterrence is implementing the use of harsher punishments that will deter those citizens whom are intending to commit a crime, will think twice before they do so. If criminals have to think about the potential consequences they may just deter away from the criminal act (Valerie Wright, 2010).
The psychological perspective sees criminal behaviour as a deviant action which causes hurt or discomfort to other people, whilst in exchange gaining a reward for themselves. Each of these views of an undesirable criminal behaviour need a remedy which will reduce or completely stop behaving in such a way again. When someone breaks the law there are two ways of dealing with them, to treat the offender, or to punish them. The aims of both treating and punishing an offender are the same, to prevent further re-offending. However both of these processes function in completely different ways, and some are more effective than others.
The main goals for indeterminate sentencing are the prevention of new crimes, rehabilitation, and to protect the criminals from excessive, unequal, or random punishments. According to the U.S. Department of Justice (1999), Indeterminate sentencing allows corrections managers to deal with problems of overcrowding or with changes in resource allocation by adjusting policies governing award of good time, setting of parole release dates, or releasing offenders on furloughs or to intermittent or partial confinement (p. 5). It is my opinion that indeterminate sentencing has the potential to change lawbreakers into law-abiding
The punishment is to protect the community from the offender by keeping them off the street, and trying to reconcile if this person wants to change for the better, in essence to also promote the rehabilitation option to the offender which could help denounce the conduct of the offender, but ultimately for the offender to recognize the harm done to the victim of the crime and the community. The offender needs to understand the damage that has been done by their crime, and understand their actions affect everyone around them. The punishment applies to the offender per the crime committed. If the offender committed a federal crime then they go to a federal prison, if the offender is only sentenced to a year of time they will go to a jail, and for almost every other crime they would go to a state prison. The prison whether it be state or federal its main objectives in preventing and controlling criminal behavior and acts.
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.
If any citizen tries to misuse his or her basic rights, or take away other citizens, law enforcement is required to take action on it. Individual citizens are empowered by knowing what their rights are because it can protect you from self-incrimination and, keep the criminal justice system from convicting and individual of something they did not do. It can also help you to not get arrested for something you did not do, Knowing what your rights are can also help you know what is criminal from not being criminal, and can keep you out of the criminal justice system. The role of the
There were several reasons behind this. One reason was to divert ones who would normally have no issue in committing a crime and for ones who have already committed crimes after their release not likely to return and serve a sentence. Penitentiaries also serve as a place to face punishment when one has committed a crime as well as encourage any type of personal reform for their actions. Penitentiaries are especially used to protect innocent people from these one who have committed crimes (Encyclopedia Britannica, 2011). American prisons have two different types of models.
Meaning, if you break the law of which has been given you will be punished. The relationship is simple, most laws are created based on crimes that are or have been committed. Because society evolves and changes there will always be new laws created based on the fact that new crimes are committed daily. The consensus and conflict model are the two most common models of how society determines which act s are criminal. The consensus model defines criminal behavior as acts that conflict with the values and beliefs of society as a whole.
In the 1970s, the strong emphasis on rehabilitation that had existed since the turn of the century gave way first to a focus on equality and fairness in sentencing, and then to an increased focus on incapacitation, deterrence and restraint strategies of crime prevention. Today, incapacitation is the primary justification for imprisonment in the U.S. criminal justice system. While this analysis of crime prevention focuses on how effective these different strategies are in reducing crime, it is important to remember that each strategy has impacts other than crime reduction. For example, analysis of the costs and benefits is critically important in any examination of policy relevant issues. This has been the focus of much of the incapacitation discussion because of the large impact associated with policies that increase the need for building, operating and maintaining the prisons necessary for incapacitation.
The key difference between these two models is that the crime control model is much more harsh and unrelenting; it emphasizes controlling crime via punishing suspects while the due process model emphasizes careful examination to ensure less innocent people are unjustly convicted. The crime control model places an emphasis on "placing as few restrictions as possible on the ability of law enforcement officers to make discretionary decisions in apprehending criminals"(Gaines). Under this model, courts would be more willing to convict offenders, even with an absence of compelling evidence. For example, a court would be more willing to accept a police officer's account of a homicide without careful cross-examination under the crime control model in order to repress crime. In contrast, the due process model emphasizes "protecting the rights of the accused through formal, legal restraints on the police, courts, and corrections" (Gaines).