Purposes of punishment
1. What are the five purposes of punishment?
Punishment is prescribed under the law or in correctional facilities to achieve different goals and objectives. In this regard, punishment can be adopted for incapacitation purposes. Incapacitation means that sufficient and harsh punishment is used to prevent future crimes by removing the defendant from society (Ambos, 2013). The criminals are prevented from being in society, thus maintaining law and order. For instance, a criminal can be subjected to house arrests or executed pursuant to a death penalty to ensure that the criminal does not exist in society.
Punishment is used to attain rehabilitation purposes to ensure that the criminal is prevented by circumstances engaging in crime. Rehabilitation ensures that the criminal is subjected to mandatory programs while in correctional facilities (Ambos, 2013). For instance, rehabilitation can be achieved through counseling, treatment center placement, vocational programs, and education programs. Rehabilitation is combined with parole/probation and incarceration to make punishment effective.
Punishment is prescribed with the intention of retribution. The retribution aspect of punishment ensures that future crime is prevented through removing the desire for personal avengement against the defendant (Ambos, 2013). In this case, when the society learns that the criminal or the defendant has been sufficiently punished, they are satisfied that the criminal justice system is working effectively, thus upholding faith in the government and law enforcement. For instance, when punishments directly proportional to the crime are prescribed, people will have faith in the criminal justice system.
Punishment under the law is implemented to attain the purpose of restitution. Restitution prevents future crime by punishing the defendant financially, such that they sufficiently repay their victim for the crime committed (Pifferi, 2016). Under restitution, the court orders the criminal defendant to pay for the harm and damages caused to the victim to restore their former state as it was before the crime was committed. The restitution is prescribed based on emotional distress, loss of money or property, and physical injuries caused. For instance, the criminal defendant is fine amounts that will sufficiently cover the damage and loss they have caused.
Additionally, punishment is prescribed to protect the members of the society by ensuring that law and order are maintained in the interest of the common good. Punishment is prescribed to deter people from engaging in crime or reduce recidivism (Pifferi, 2016). For instance, harsh punishments and incarceration remove criminals from society in the interest of protecting society.
2. What are shaming punishments? How are they used? In your opinion, are shaming punishments a valid way to punish? Why or why not.
Shaming punishment entails the intentional public humiliation of offenders and defendants in relation to their different crimes. Shaming punishments expose the offender to the public, revealing their different crimes, thus shaming them into preventing them and others from engaging in related crimes (Goldman, 2015). For instance, a criminal can be forced to wear a T-shirt or sign indicating their crimes while outside the courts and in public places to shame them. Shaming punishment ensures that recidivism rates are reduced, and people are deterred from engaging in crime due to fear of being put through public shaming.
Shaming punishment is used by making it known to the public and the society that one has engaged in a certain crime mostly detested in society. Criminal justice ensures that the criminal is associated with their different crime to shame them, their families, and close ties (Harden, 2012). For instance, a criminal involved in a burglary in society can be paraded in public places and on social media platforms to cause shame to them, thus preventing them and others from engaging in similar crimes.
Shaming punishments are valid, and they should be increasingly used in society. The shaming aspect acts as a deterrent measure preventing people from engaging in crimes. The shaming punishments need to be combined with other forms of punishments, such as incapacitation, to make them effective and efficient (Harden, 2012). For instance, while collar crimes need to be punished through shaming and incapacitation, thus making them effective.
References
Ambos, K. (2013). Punishment without a sovereign? The ius puniendi issue of international criminal law: A first contribution towards a consistent theory of international criminal law. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 33(2), 293-315.
Goldman, L. M. (2015). Trending now: the use of social media websites in public shaming punishments. Am. Crim. L. Rev., 52, 415.
Harden, A. N. (2012). Rethinking the shame: The intersection of shaming punishments and American juvenile justice. UC Davis J. Juv. L. & Pol’y, 16, 93.
Pifferi, M. (2016). Reinventing punishment. A comparative history of criminology and penology in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries (pp. 1-305). Oxford University Press.
