'Is punishment always the right solutions to stop crime? Essay\r'

'Punishments be meted break through for three reasons †deterrence, retributivism, and incapacitation. The first, deterrence seeks to prohibit future slander doing. Retributivism is linked to nonions of justness where abuse moldiness be met with an appropriate punishment. The last, incapacitation, seeks to protect society at astronomical from criminals. This essay will examine whether punishment is perpetually the the duty expression on solution to wear out curse, in hoy of the reasons for dishing protrude punishment to criminals. From the perspective of justice, punishment is the right solution to s nip hatred, as justice must be upheld in society. However, from a more(prenominal) virtual(a) point of view, punishment whitethorn non unceasingly be the right commission to dot crime as it is of cristal in payoffive. Instead of just meting out punishment, the right solutions should focus on educating and reforming the offenders as swell up as educating the g eneral public for the sake of a better society in the future.\r\nRead more: Essays on crime\r\nDeterrence\r\nFrom a matter-of-fact perspective, punishment is not always the right way to stop crime as its deterrence effect is limited. For the offenders, deterrence presends a threat of negative consequences to pr evet offenders from engaging in criminal activity in the future; for the public, deterrence send a marrow to the general population to show that if one engages in criminal activity, there will be toilsome consequences. The assumption is that human beings atomic number 18 rational to exhort the benefits and loses of committing a crime. It might seem that the prospect of receiving a death sentence would deter murderers from committing such offences. However, galore(postnominal) studies on deterrence and the death penalty do not support this idea. The deterrence theory is not always applicable to all the cases, especially for violent. This is because near of the time whe n the offenders commit violent crimes, their criminal clothed overshadows their ability to think rationally of the consequences of their wrongful act. For instance, terrorists are ordain to sacrifice their lives to commit the crime, so even the most severe punishment death penalty does not serve as a deterrence for them. Also, a recent study published in the Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology reported that 88% of the country’s top criminologists surveyed do not believe the death penalty acts as a deterrent to homicide.\r\nThese statistics all shows that the deterrence effect of the punishment kindlenot always erase people’s look of committing crime. As long as offenders are willing to take the consequences, the deterrence effect does not carry on them. In contrast, the alternative of civic education, can help erase people’s end of committing the crime. Unlike the deterrence effect, it has an edifying effect. With implanting the right imperious valu es, the potential offenders would learn how to find alternative methods to use up their anger to someone or to distract themselves from committing the crime. In this way, their negative intent can be erased and vector sum in stopping the crime. Therefore, in my opinion, the civic education is more effective than punishment and it should be right solutions to stop the crime.\r\nRetributivism\r\nWhile in some(prenominal) cases, punishment metes out the appropriate justices, this is not true in all the cases. Sometimes, punishment whitethorn be covert to the causes of the crime and the circumstances of the criminal. The result is that punishment is not always the right method to stop the crime. Retributivism is a form of justice, whereby when an offender breaks a law, they are inevitable to forfeit something in return. It is based on the convention of lex talionis: â€Å"An eye for an eye, a life history for a life”, which states that whatever crime carried out will be pu nished proportionally. An some other purpose of retributivism is to bring the settlement for the victims for a short status, however, this only brings short term benefits for victims. In the long run, the retributivism does not serve to figure the real problems of the offenders. There are many cases that criminals may be wrongfully accused and sentenced to death. Cases like Li Yan, a Chinese woman who killed her abusive keep up after 4 months of brutal domestic forcefulness was sentenced to death. However, her action can be regarded as self-defense.\r\nHence, absolution International East Asia has tried to call for a reversal of the sentence. The real problem behind this crime is the lack of protection of women from the domestic violence in China. However, the judgment only focused on how Li Yan should give her life for a life. The punishment in reality fails to address the fundamental causes of crimes and fails to do true justice, inclined that the criminal has sympathetic circumstances. In many cases, offenders committing crimes may due to some reluctant difficulties or they expect survive in a harsh conditions. Therefore, alternatively of just meting out the punishment blindly, it is more cardinal to ensure that true justice is through, such that criminals are not wrongfully convicted. This can be done by solving the social issues behind the crime and it is a more proper solution to stop the crime.\r\nIncapacitation\r\nIncarcerating risk of exposureous people to get them off the driveway and remove them from society helps prevent future prostitute by these criminals. Imprisonment punishes people by removing their right to personal liberty. However, the incapacitation effect does not serve to set and reform the offenders. Once the offenders are released from prison, they may earnest commit the crime again. Jon Venables, 31, was released from jail just over 3 years ago, but was soon was sent back to prison for distributing child pornography. W hen he was ten years old, he served 8 years for cleansing two-year-old kid called James Bulger. James’s parents were fiery with the decision to release such a danger person as they believe it is only a matter of time before he commits other crime against a child. There are many offenders like Jon Venables who always repeat the same crimes. This shows that incarcerating the offender is not able to reform him into a good person. Solutions should achieve the purpose of educating and reforming the offender on top of imposing a penalty for their wrong deportment so as to stop him recommitting the crime. The incapacitation effect of the punishment clearly fails to serve this purpose.\r\nMany offenders start get into their criminal habits since young. The lack of correction from their parents or inform indulges their wrongfulness and results in the difficulties of reforming them after they are handsome up. Therefore, punishment is not always the right solutions to stop crime as it does not change or reform offenders’ habits and concepts. Compare to civic education, it is clearly farthest more efficient for stop the crime as it help form the good habits and moral concepts in people. Moral education enlightens the general public’s sense of justice. Implanting positive values in spring chicken is the best way to prevent crimes as harbor the good characters and habits need to start cultivating from childhood. The punishment is congenital for society to function. We sleep well at iniquity because criminals are being locked up and punished, and victims feel that they form achieved redress for the wrong suffered.\r\nA survey in 2005 shows that 95% of Singaporeans feel that death penalty should stick by as it increases the sense of security. Hence, while it is true that sometimes criminals are wrongfully convicted, and that they may not be deterred or reformed, we do need a governance of punishments in place due to our notion of justice. W e cannot in all adopt an educational or rehabilitative approach. In conclusion, while punishments can be the right way to stop crimes (at least in terms of justice and how punishments are a reflection of the moral cipher of society), the effectiveness of punishments can be limited, hence by chance it should be implemented in conjunction with other approaches.\r\n'