Sentencing When Many People Talk

¶ … Sentencing

When many people talk about sentencing criminals, they focus on a single aspect of the sentencing process, and approach sentencing with the assumption that sentencing. However, there are actually several different purposes to criminal sentencing. In fact, there are four main purposes to criminal sentencing: retribution, deterrence, incapacitation, and rehabilitation. Retribution refers to the idea that a criminal sentence should provide some type of revenge or vengeance upon the wrongdoer. Deterrence is aimed at preventing crime. Incapacitation refers to the idea that, while serving his sentence, a criminal is unable to reoffend. Finally rehabilitation refers to the goal of transforming a prisoner into a productive member of society. All five of these elements can impact the sentencing process.

While criminal sentencing might have several different goals, in the United States the primary goal of such sentencing is retribution. For example, when one looks at Florida's sentencing guidelines, the stated purpose of sentencing becomes clear. F.S. 921.001(4)(a)(2) specifically provides that "the primary purpose of sentencing is to punish the offender. Rehabilitation is a desired goal of the criminal justice system but is subordinate to the goal of punishment." The problem with a justice system that is focused on retribution is that it certainly appears to promote a criminal lifestyle. The United States has incarceration rates that greatly exceed those of other industrialized Western nations. While some of this disparity can be explained by American drug policy, the fact remains that the United States is a highly criminal nation. Obviously, using retribution as the driving force behind criminal punishments is not doing anything to reduce criminality in the United States. This fact is crucial when one considers that the criminal justice system exists to provide the public with remedies for wrongdoing, not to provide a venue for addressing individual wrongs. In fact, if one considers the death penalty, where the strongest and most factually cohesive argument in favor of the penalty is retribution, one sees a scenario where a collective desire for retribution results in tremendously increased financial costs to society, because imposing the death penalty is extremely expensive. Moreover, when retribution is the primary focus of sentencing, it leads to an atmosphere were prison conditions become unimportant, since the purpose of sentencing is to punish an offender. However, the dehumanizing and brutal conditions of many prisons expose many prisoners to far greater dangers and to victimization of far more serious crimes than the ones they committed to get incarcerated in the first place.

Deterrence is another reason for sentencing, and may be the most compelling reason for imposing punishment for crimes. Specific deterrence is aimed at keeping that particular offender from reoffending, and might take into account that offender's criminal history. This type of deterrence can be measured across a population by examining recidivism and desistance rates (Farrington, 2007). General deterrence refers to the idea that a sentence could prevent a general member of the public from offending. While many people do not commit crimes because of their own moral codes, some crimes are prevented because of fear of punishment. Deterrence relies on a potential offender making a risk-reward analysis and deciding not to offend because the rewards for offending are less than the risks of offending. However, for many crimes, particularly serious crimes like murder, emotions play a huge role in the underlying actions, and it seems like a stretch to assume that offenders engage in extensive risk analysis before acting. Furthermore, specific deterrence is aimed at keeping an offender from becoming a recidivist, but offenders who are exposed to those who are more criminal may actually become more likely, not only to reoffend, but to escalate their levels of criminality (Chen and Shapiro, 2007).

Of course, one way that offenders can be deterred from offending is by incapacitating them. Sometimes the goal of sentencing is just to be able to keep that particular offender from engaging in further criminal behavior. Theoretically, putting an offender in jail automatically fulfills this goal of sentencing. However, the reality is that, even in prison, people can engage in criminal behavior. In fact, crime is rampant behind bars. For example, incarcerated males are much more likely to be raped or murdered than general population members, and these crimes are often ignored by prison officials. It is only if one looks at retribution as the primary goal of sentencing that one can really think of imprisonment as incapacitation, because, from that perspective, crimes against other criminals do not carry the same weight as crimes against non-criminals. The reality is that any criminal has the opportunity to offend against people in prison, and those potential victims can include prison staff and visitors, as well as other offenders.

The final goal of sentencing is rehabilitation. Rehabilitation refers to the goal of transforming a prisoner into a productive member of society, and is aimed at making society safer and reducing overall crime rates. Rehabilitation examines the underlying causes of criminal behavior. When one looks at those causes, it becomes clear that, for certain portions of society, criminal behavior can be a logical choice. For example, children in poverty-stricken areas who face dangers that have been compared to war-zones might be making rational decisions when they choose to join gangs, even though membership has risks, because they generally gain greater personal security and access to wealth with membership. Rehabilitation focuses on changing the circumstances for the individual, so that he or she has the possibility of leading a productive non-criminal lifestyle.