prisonisaneffectivewayofreducingcriminal.docVIP

PRISON IS AN EFFECTIVE WAY OF REDUCING CRIMINAL BEHAVIOUR VS ALTERNATIVES INTRO Punishment is what most of us do. It is our teaching legacy passed down from generation to generation. We are virtually surrounded by punishing strategies used to influence our behavior: From overdue library books to dogs without licenses; fines, penalties and reprimands whirl around us like leaves in a storm. For many of us, to give up punishment as our primary tool with which to influence negative behavior is to leave us empty handed (Friedman, 2001). Prison population- England and Wales (1900-2012) – increase. From 20.000 to 90.000. - 95% male. Cost -is same as putting on Olympics Every Year. (9,5 billion to 13 billion a year) . 42.999 a year per inmate is more than the cost of sending offenders to Eton. These people had been sentenced according to the guidelines set out in section 142 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003. The legislation proposed that the main purposes of sentencing are to rehabilitate offenders, punish offenders, reduce crime, protect the public and make amends to the people who have been affected by the crime. But has prison been effective in meeting these purposes? Nelson Mandela once said “no one truly knows a nation until one has been inside its jails” Reasons for punishing The legislative power belongs to the people, and can belong to it alone. - Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1762). Studies examined motives underlying people’s desire to punish. -Retribution – just deserts/eye for an eye, the repair of justice through unilateral imposition of punishment” (Wenzel, 2007) –is an end in itself, morally justifiable. Moral proportionality – a punishment should mirror the degree of moral offense that the perpetrator created (magnitude of harm, intentions, extenuating circumstances) “Just deserts” Incapacitation – likelihood of reoffending (Carlsmith, 2005) Kunlangeta: the man who repeatedly lies and steals, does not go hunting and, when the other men are out