Logic of Sentencing Criminals Humanity Has Always

Logic of Sentencing Criminals

Humanity has always dealt with the problems related to crimes committed against both individuals and the public. Philosophers, judges, lawyers, public figures, government officials, and corrections institutions have proposed many forms of punishments or treatments to deter public and individual crimes in a given society. These punishments and treatments have built upon the past theories and ideas and also responded to the needs and interests of the given time or a society. In America today, there are four basic philosophical reasons for sentencing and six commonly known forms of punishment. When discussing the reasoning for sentencing and the forms of punishment, Americans offer one form of punishment or another depending on one's personal views and understandings. Some prefer severe punishments for the purposes of retribution and deterrence, while others specifically focus on rehabilitation. For the purpose of reducing recidivism, however, it is important to strike a proper balance, targeting the right persons for rehabilitation and others for stronger punishment. At the heart of these policies and programs should be evidence-based practices.

Of the four philosophical reasons for sentencing criminals, incapacitation refers to prevention of the offender from committing further crimes, usually through imprisonment. Retribution, also known as just deserts, refers to penalties imposed on the offender in strict accordance with what, according to the judgment, he or she deserves because of the crime he or she has committed. The third reason for sentencing is rehabilitation: attempts to "treat" or "correct" the offender through a variety of measures so that the former offender can safely return to society and avoid committing crimes in the future. The fourth is deterrence, which sometimes is divided into two forms: general deterrence in which a penalty is imposed on the offender to deter other potential offenders in public from committing crimes for fear of similar punishment, and individual or special deterrence which refers to penalty imposed on the offender so that he or she will not commit any further crime because of the fear of punishment (McFatter, 1982, p. 255). These are the most common reasons for sentencing although societal needs may necessitate other reasons. For example, today it is common for judges to take into consideration such factors as prison overcrowding or the costs of incarceration for sentencing purposes (Miller & Gaines, 2011, p. 257).

Based on these reasons for sentencing criminals, judges and legislators in the United States today commonly use six main forms of punishment. The first is capital punishment, or death penalty, that is reserved for the most serious crimes such as first degree murder under aggravated circumstances. The second is imprisonment, which is the most common form of punishment and may be imposed for the purposes of all four philosophical reasons: retribution, incapacitation, deterrence, and rehabilitation. Rehabilitation programs sometimes become part of the prison regulation. Probation, which allows the offender to live within the community under supervision, is the third form of punishment. Probation may also include such dispositions as boot camps, house arrest, and electronic monitoring. Prison overcrowding and the high costs of incarceration have contributed to the increase of this form of punishment in the United States in recent decades (Miller & Gaines, 2011, pp. 257-8).

The fourth form of punishment involves the imposition of fines on the offender. They may be imposed independently of others forms of punishment or in addition to probation and incarceration. When the judge assumes the offender not to be a threat to society, fine is usually imposed as the only form of punishment. In some cases, the seizure of the offender's property such as illegal drug may be the form of fine imposed. The fifth form of punishment is restitution and community service. Here the offender does not pay to the government but to the injured party and the community. The offender may be required to make direct payments to the victim or community organizations and also perform publicly perceived "good works." Restorative justice is the sixth form of punishment judges sometimes resort to. The offender is sentenced to work on repairing the damage to the victim, his or her families, and the community through apologies and restitution. These are the six common forms of punishment. In some instances, judges may use forms of punishment that do not fall under any of these categories. For example, so-called "creative punishment" may sentence disorderly teenagers to attend a night opera performance or sentence a husband who has slapped his wife to yoga classes (Miller & Gaines, 2011, p. 258).

Unlike the judges, the public displays a greater variety of reasons for sentencing and the forms of punishment. There has always been a segment among any society that would favor severe punishments. The tough "lock 'em up" attitude has been quite popular in the United States in the last several decades, but the American public has also consistently displayed support for rehabilitative and correctional treatment as integral parts of correctional policy (Cullen & Skovron, 1990; Applegate & Cullen, 1997; Kifer, Hemmens, & Stohr, 2003, p. 67). Research on the attitudes of jail and prison staff demonstrates that those directly working with offenders in prisons have different views on the problem. In a survey conducted in several correctional institutions, prison and jail staff favored incapacitation as the best form of punishment, followed by deterrence, rehabilitation, and retribution. The views also depend on such variables as age, gender, security or military background, and years of practice. For instance, older staff and women favored rehabilitation most, while those in maximum security favored incapacitation and deterrence (Kifer, Hemmens, & Stohr, 2003).