Corrections Punishment in a Historical

Corrections

Punishment in a historical perspective

There has always been much controversy concerning criminals and the effect that punishment is expected to have on them and on society as a whole. People have traditionally perceived punishment as a form of castigation meant to have criminals suffer for the wrongs that they performed. Others believed that it was meant to influence others to refrain from committing illegalities as a result of seeing that the authorities were employing harsh attitudes toward criminals. Last, but not least, some considered that punishment was a form of reeducating individuals with the purpose of assisting them in being able to reintegrate the social order as honest persons.

The history of punishments goes back as far as Gildamesh, near the year of 2700 B.C. Although the idea of punishing someone for a wrong that the respective person committed is old, it was not until Gildamesh that laws were actually designed with the purpose of differentiating between acts that people could perform and acts that were illegal. The masses did not express particular interest in the matter, as they considered it perfectly normal for individuals to be punished as a consequence of their offenses (Leyons 1).

Most people are familiar with the Code of Hammurabi as being written around 1750 B.C. And as being the first official organized document which provided a strict set of laws. "By this code, the abiding principle was Talio which had to do for mutilating or amputating the part of the body that had committed a crime" (Leyons 1). This law system is responsible for issuing numerous death punishments and is largely believed to have inspired a series of other legal codes that followed.

The Code of Hammurabi inspired the Greeks and the Greeks inspired the Romans, who had one of the most complex law systems ever. These peoples practically wanted to guarantee that stability and equality were made possible as a result of individuals fearing the repercussions associated with committing a crime. Punishment was practically the universal response to an instance in which a person committed a crime.

Punishments are very diverse and they differ on account of concepts such as cultural values, the gravity of the crimes that they are meant to be a response to, and people's determination to set examples out of criminals. As one is likely to understand consequent to becoming acquainted with the condition involving the Code of Hammurabi, the Ancient Greeks, and the Romans, "all societies and social groups develop ways to control behavior that violates norms" (Miethe & Lu, 2). In order for a person to be categorized as a social individual, he or she needs to act in accordance with a set of rules imposed by the community that he or she is interested of integrating.

It is difficult and almost impossible to determine whether or not punishment is effective, considering that it can actually influence felons to adopt harsher attitudes with the purpose of getting revenge for being punished. The idea of capital punishment is especially controversial, as there were a series of cases throughout history involving such measures being taken for crimes that were not necessarily severe. As a consequence, some individuals did not hesitate to commit grave crimes as long as they knew that the punishment would eventually be the same. Numerous unnecessary crimes took place before the authorities realized that they needed to reform their policies with regard to the idea of punishment.

A lot has changed when considering the concept of punishment in the contemporary society, as people have come to gain a more complex understanding of crimes and have gotten actively involved in taking on attitudes that would represent effective responses to particular criminal acts. Even with this, there is still a lot of controversy regarding the effectiveness of punishment in general and the exact outcome that is expected from criminals consequent to the moment when they are punished. Society today promotes thinking regarding how it would be wrong to hurt someone or to subject the respective individual to pain. The fact that punishment involves the direct infliction of pain thus generates controversy and makes it difficult for people to understand whether they should support it or not. Even with this, the authorities emphasize that inflicting pain on criminals is different from inflicting pain on innocent individuals. The former were well-acquainted with the aftermath associated to performing an illegal act and still went through with acting in disagreement with the law. As a result it only seems safe to say that they inflict pain on themselves by committing illegalities (Pollock 1).