Prison Term Policy Recommendation CJA/323 September 19, 2011 Jacqueline Waltman Abstract As a criminologist and someone who works as an advisor to a member of the state legislature that will soon hold a vote on a bill that will determine whether or not the maximum prison term for any person who is convicted of armed robbery should be doubled I will do my best to give an opinionated view on this subject that will be substantial enough for the person to whom I am advising to make a quality decision. My boss understands that the bill being placed before us is one that is incredibly popular but questions the merit of the bill because they are afraid the new legislation will not do much good. I will advise my boss by making recommendations
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. The members of the Classical School of Thought believed that preventing crime was more important than punishing the criminal. When criminals know what the punishment is going to be for the crimes that they are going to commit it will help to deter the crimes from being committed. When people do commit crimes the crime is done of their own free will. This procedure of knowing the punishment with it being severe to the
Mencken states that this is another point that is uncertain and can be argued. Those who are for capital punishment assume that the only reason capital punishment is wanted is to deter crime. This is in fact, not true. It is obviously one of the aims of punishment but not the only one. “They believe that we simply hang or electrocute A in order to alarm B so he will not kill C” (Mencken 145).
Others may think the exclusionary rule should not be used to enforce the Fourth Amendment. They feel at times it is necessary for the exclusionary rule to not be used. I can understand their position because they are looking at putting the accused defendant behind bars and make sure they are punished to the fullest. At times without the exclusionary rule, the case in court can succeed and get the result the prosecution and maybe even what the public want. Sometimes people feel the defendant has too many rights and has more benefits, which could help them get away with criminal activity.
Introduction The militarization of the nation’s police forces may have taken off after September 11, 2001, but in reality started long before that dreadful day. This paper is going to look at the issues which brought on not only the change itself but will also look at misconceptions and misunderstanding of the American public. Local police have been forced to evolve with the changing threat to their communities and learn more advance tactics to protecting their citizens. To begin we will look at what the issue is and why militarization of police has become an issue. The Issue Since September 11th 2001 the United States have been at war with terrorists who have brought the fight to America’s homeland.
The IRA has communicated through political parties their intentions of another systematic type of bombings similar to those of the 1970’s and 1990’s. Combating the IRA The British government created the Joint Terrorism Analyst Center within MI5 tasked with combating the IRA. The head of this agency Jonathan Evans the IRA as a real and immediate threat in a television interview in September 2011. Combating the IRA in Northern Ireland is a daunting task, with that area referred to by experts as the “Laboratory of Terrorism” (Dingly 2012). MI5 uses similar tactics and operations as the DHS in combating terrorism.
During times of war, it is understandable that the Government will be more apt to protect its people. In the United States, terrorism has become a major concern. This has come to light more recently after the 9/11 attack in 2004. Americans have been told that terrorism is their biggest enemy. Though in the attempts to obtain security, the people of the United States are giving up their freedoms and others are having those same freedoms taken away from them.
The general ideal of the deterrence method suggest that one punishment is enough to deter other people if the situation is take care of quickly enough. General deterrence basically believes if young people see that society both intends to punish criminal acts, they will be deterred from committing a crime by the factors and awareness. The more severe and swift the punishment is, then the greater of the deterrent effect. An example could be having more police officers on the streets, thus convincing potential delinquents that they will be caught. Specific deterrence method focuses on the fact that if an individual is punished strongly for one crime, then they will not commit this crime again out of fear of punishment.
In the article "Understanding Terrorism" by Tori DeAngelis, states that there is no evidence that ceased from terrorism results in de-radicalization. They state the problem is individuals interpretation and perspective of things and what makes sense to us is different to what makes sense to people on the ground. Therefore they conclude that these programs will not help, but also it might bring the former terrorist and add fuel to the fire. In closing, there are many causes of terrorism , but theres also many ways to prevent it. Anti- terrorist and de-radicalization programs are designed to help people with radical thoughts to think otherwise.
If the only reason to pull someone over depends on his or her race, this causes a discriminatory impact. Police departments begun to review data on stops and change police officers behaviors, arguments and attitudes towards the leading of stereotype based discriminatory treatment. (Racial profiling, 2012) This researcher frowns much upon racial profiling but with surveys conducted every day on who is likely to commit a crime, and what age, and what sex, and what minority group then people tend to lean towards these surveys proving that race is a huge part of crime involvement. In conclusion, criminal profiling works as an investigative tool to help solve crimes. Criminal profiling has come a long way and still needs a lot of improvement.