Four Purposes Of Punishment
Prioritization
Deterrence, incapacitation, rehabilitation and retribution are the four purposes of punishment that address criminality, promote public safety and reduce crime. To begin with, rehabilitation is a top priority and the most important among the four purposes of punishment. Rehabilitation prevents future crimes by offering reductions, treatment, vocational programs and counseling to defendants. Rehabilitation has been the best option, especially in reducing incarceration rates and Helping individual’s reform and getting back to society (Canton, 2017). Rehabilitation can be combined with incarceration, parole or probation, where the main goal is to reduce offender’s recidivism through integrating community-based approaches.
Incapacitation is the second best mode of punishment in the list of priorities that comes in the form of house arrest, incarceration and death penalties. According to statistics, seventy-percent of people are arrested within five years, where incapacitation is a major form of punishment in most countries, including the United States.
Retribution is the third effective way of reducing crime; the offender is punished, which serves as an example. Through retribution, the society and the victim become satisfied hence removing the urge of personal vengeance (Canton, 2017). The kind of punishment offered includes fines and sentencing the defendant. Retribution is a popular and effective mode of punishment which aims at reducing crime and educating the public.
Deterrence is the least impactful, challenging to assess and morally inacceptable whose purpose is to inflict fear to an individual defendant or the public through harsh punishment. For instance, a death sentence, life imprisonment or incarceration (Canton, 2017). Deterrence can either be specific, general, marginal or partial according to the target audience.
Capital Punishmentâs Fit
Capital punishment fits in retribution, incapacitation and deterrence, where the purposes of punishment can lead to reforms of the death penalty. Rehabilitation is the only purpose of punishment that does not conform to capital punishment. Rehabilitation reduces the rate of incarceration and the chances of death sentences (Berryessa, 2020). Rehabilitation and incarceration are used to re-evaluate future dangerousness with time hence not considering the death sentence a priority. According to the Supreme Court, deterrence and retribution morally and legally justify capital punishment. The lethal alternatives tend to reduce future violence by impacting fear in society. The retribution urge of the death penalty in most countries, including the United States, is determined by emotions.
The emotions expressed in capital punishment, such as anger, sympathy, and disgust, are difficult, especially when emotions and reason result in conflicting judgment. Incapacitation would reduce the chances of a person incarcerated and sentenced for the death penalty from being killed. If an offender is sentenced to death for future violence, the person may be reduced to life (Berryessa, 2020). Capital punishment fits in deterrence where the act and threat to execute an individual may reduce future violent cases hence reduce the number of people engagement in crime. Although deterrence does not reduce or stop the future execution of convicted death penalty persons.
Personal Opinion
Capital punishment in deterrence, incapacitation and rehabilitation should not be considered as a way of reducing crime whatsoever. Since capital punishment is inclusive of the death penalty, deterrence as a purpose of punishment should be made less painful and fair ways of reducing criminality. Developing reforms of making capital punishment fairer would embrace the death penalty. Before considering capital punishment, human dignity, future security, accuracy and consistency of the methods should be considered. Options to address future violence should be c embraced, for instance, police involvement and providing employment opportunities.
Rehabilitation and incapacitation the highest priority align with my personal opinion, where the methods focus on reducing the chances of death sentences. Other alternatives, such as offering education, use of rehabilitation, and incapacitation, can Help reduce chances of capital punishment hence maintaining human dignity and future security. Retribution and deterrence purpose of crime as the least prioritized misalign with personal opinion because the methods seek to use the most severe method that would reduce future dangerousness to the individual offender and the society. The use of capital punishment to avoid future violence and criminality should not be an option; rather, other alternatives should be embraced to protect human dignity.
References
Berryessa, C. M. (2020). The effects of essentialist thinking toward biosocial risk factors for criminality and types of offending on lay punishment support. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 38(4), 355-380.
Canton, R. (2017). Why Punish?: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Punishment. Macmillan International Higher Education.
