L. Elise Bowling
CRJ 301 Juvenile Justice
September 20, 2010
Over the years, there has been great debate over the purpose of sentencing criminals, but it generally all boils down to the importance of deterrence, incapacitation, rehabilitation, and retribution. All four plays an important role in sentencing, and each vary on a case-by-case basis. As far as the purpose of criminal sentencing goes, it is imperative that all courts are on the same page and strive to achieve the same outcome.
Due to the ever-changing society we live in, there has always been controversy as to what the right objective was for the criminal when it comes to
…show more content…
In order to help set an example and deter future crime, the punishment needs to fit the criminal. The courts will also take into consideration other criminals and use harsh punishments to help deter and warn others what is in store for them if they choose a life of crime. As I stated earlier, rehabilitation was the standard for criminals years ago, and now it is slowly making a come back. I believe that rehabilitation is crucial to an offender and the key to preventing recidivism. Some believe criminal behavior is the result of social or psychological disorders, and treatment of such disorders should be the primary goal of corrections (Meloy). I think this is a positive way to treat offenders who are incarcerated, and often rehabilitation is a success. The purpose of rehabilitation in criminal sentencing is to attempt to treat the offender instead of punish. The rehabilitation process can also continue during supervised parole or probation. Moving on to the retribution phase of criminal sentencing, there are many perspectives as to how this form of punishment should factor in. According to our textbook, K.G. Armstrong has made a logical argument that retribution is not vengeance. He states that revenge is personal, while retribution involves lawful action on the part of the state to protect its members (Wallace &…