The two primary rationales for punishment for crimes are deterrence and retribut

Question

The two primary rationales for punishment for crimes are deterrence and retribution. Does one seem like a better reason - does it depend on the type of crime?

Does it make a difference that some types of crimes have much higher recidivism rates?

For instance, some studies show it is extremely unlikely that someone who has committed a murder will commit another one and most studies show that most murderers have very low recidivism rates. Property crimes, however (like larceny), have extremely high recidivism rates.

Explanation / Answer

Amongst the two reasons for punishment for crimes deterrence and retribution deterrence seems to be a better reason if justice is not delayed and a prompt justice is meted out to the defendants in a criminal proceeding it will set precedence for the person i.e. defendant as well as the public. The recidivism rates are low amongst the murderers than property crimes, like larceny as the severity of punishment is different for a murder crime and larceny. Thus the deterrence is less for the property crime than for murder crime. The defendant of a murder crime is tried for death sentence while one of the property crime is not tried for a death sentence hence the deterrence is less in case of property crime. As the deterrence, both personnel of the defendant and the public is different in the different types of crime the rates of recidivism is different.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse T
• Subjects

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.