Sentencing Paper

My theory for the reasoning of punishment has two main goals which are to provide justice for the victims and a lesson to the convicted. When a judge sits in preparation to initiate sentencing they have to go through numerous thought processes because of the uniqueness of every case. Considerations such as what are they trying to accomplish with the punishment and who would benefit from such a sentence. General factors like the age of the convicted and the heinousness of the crime committed matters as well. When a criminal is sentence it is reasoned by retribution, deterrence, incapacitation, or rehabilitation.
One of the types of sentences that can be given to a criminal can be in the form of retribution. Retribution can also be seen as saying an eye for an eye for example if a kid is caught stealing a candy bar from a convenient store then the punishment may be that they have to pay for it somehow. This type of sentence is mostly seen in death penalty cases today such as a life for a life. “The law of "an eye for an eye" is usually called the law of retribution, or "lex talionis" (Latin, lex [law] and talio [like]; the punishment is like the injury), or the law of equivalency.” (Rodríguez, 1998)
Another type of sentence given to a criminal is deterrence and in lamens terms it is the use of punishment as a threat to deter people from offending. Deterrence can be divided into three separate categories. “Specific deterrence, as used in criminal justice, refers to crime prevention achieved through instilling fear in the specific individual being punished such that they refrain from future violation of the law; also referred to as individual deterrence. General deterrence, as used in criminal justice, refers to crime prevention achieved through instilling fear in the general population through the punishment of offenders. Incapacitation is considered by some to be a subset of specific deterrence. Incapacitation aims to prevent future crimes not by rehabilitating the individual but rather from taking away his ability to commit such acts. Under this theory, criminals are put in jail not so that they will learn the consequence of their actions but rather so that while there they will be unable to engage in crime.” (Parkinson, 2002)
As just specified another sentence that can be given is incapacitation. Incapacitation is a philosophy of incarceration that argues that some offenders might have to be incarcerated not for what they have done but to prevent future harm to the community. This depends on the community 's ability to identify those that might re-offend. Some also argue that it is unfair to punish people for what they might do, rather than for what they have done. Selective incapacitation is provided for under dangerous offender legislation. An example in our history also compares to retribution which is cutting off a hand of a thief to prevent further thefts in a drastic manner, in addition to it having a perceived deterrent effect on others. As stated in the United States code title 18 “Factors to be considered in imposing a sentence- to protect the public from further crimes of the defendant” (LII, 2012)
The last form of reasoning behind sentencing a criminal is for rehabilitation. The purpose of rehabilitating a criminal is to fix whatever problem the convict had that caused them to commit the crime that they did. “The idea that the purpose of punishment is to apply treatment and training to the offender so that he is made capable of returning to society and functioning as a law-abiding member of the community. Established in legal practice in the 19th century, rehabilitation was viewed as a humane alternative to retribution and deterrence, though it did not necessarily result in an offender receiving a more lenient penalty than he would have received under a retributive or deterrent philosophy.” (Rehabilitation, 2012)
Recidivism is when a criminal has been punished and released back into the public as safe for the public and they relapse and end up getting rearrested. The entire process of the sentencing process is to keep the public safe by either removing the criminal from the public or rehabilitating them but no system is perfect. Criminals fall right back into their line of crime all the time. A way to improve the system without changing it, since it has not been bad it has just made a few mistakes, is by increasing the number of parole officers and to keep all former criminals under surveillance for at least 5 years as a requirement regardless of the crime. Or another option would be if a criminal recidivist a federal crime then they would automatically receive life in prison without parole and declared unable to rehabilitate. Basically the criminal got a second chance at freedom and they messed it up.
In conclusion, when a judge is at their podium they are unbiased and are working on behalf of the community including the criminal. The concept is to keep the public safe from a predator and to help the predator for their future whether it is a second chance at freedom after rehabilitation or life in prison to keep them away from the temptation of a crime. Each case has a unique personality and considerations such as what are they trying to accomplish with the punishment as well as what are the standard punishments for that specific crime. There are different types of punishments with different reasoning’s behind each one but they each share the goal of protecting the public and allowing the public to feel safe and protected.

Works Cited
Kelly, E. (2010). Punishment. Retrieved from Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosphy: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/punishment/#2

LII. (2012). § 3553. IMPOSITION OF A SENTENCE. Retrieved from Legal Information Institue: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/3553.html

Parkinson, R. D. (2002). Specific Deterrence. Retrieved from Online Dictionary of the Social Science: http://bitbucket.icaap.org/dict.pl?term=SPECIFIC%20DETERRENCE

Rehabilitation. (2012). Retrieved from Encyclopædia Britannica: http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/483544/punishment/272342/Rehabilitation

Rodríguez, Á. M. (1998, December 10). An Eye for an Eye. Retrieved from Biblical Research Institute: http://www.adventistbiblicalresearch.org/Biblequestions/eyeforeye.htm

Cited: Kelly, E. (2010). Punishment. Retrieved from Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosphy: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/punishment/#2 LII. (2012). § 3553. IMPOSITION OF A SENTENCE. Retrieved from Legal Information Institue: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/3553.html Parkinson, R. D. (2002). Specific Deterrence. Retrieved from Online Dictionary of the Social Science: http://bitbucket.icaap.org/dict.pl?term=SPECIFIC%20DETERRENCE Rehabilitation. (2012). Retrieved from Encyclopædia Britannica: http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/483544/punishment/272342/Rehabilitation Rodríguez, Á. M. (1998, December 10). An Eye for an Eye. Retrieved from Biblical Research Institute: http://www.adventistbiblicalresearch.org/Biblequestions/eyeforeye.htm