Since earlier times, deviance has been prominent in society. Overtime offenses have gradually been taken more seriously due to a better understanding on the reasoning of crime. Although criminologists theorize the origin of crime, it is still a blurry line on whether the perpetrator should physically be held accountable for his or her life. This ideology can date back to the Code of Hammurabi, where corporate punishment was a form of discipline. Corporate punishment consisted of inflicting any physical pain onto the perpetrator that was measured to the offense. This notion is still present today in modern society, however, is used in certain cases. The most common form of corporate punishment is the Death penalty. When an individual faces Capital
…show more content…
Many argue that the Death penalty functions as a specific and general deterrence in society. For instance, general deterrence aims to make the individual aware of similar consequences occurring if he or she were to commit a similar offense (Fuller 2014, 20). Whereas, specific deterrence focuses on preventing the perpetrator itself from recidivating, due to understanding the consequences of having that behavior (Fuller 2014, 20). It is argued that one fears death and would rather face a life sentence in prison than Capital punishment. This allegedly is the reason why those who deviate lessen the severity of their offense to avoid the Death penalty. A professor at Fordham University states his belief in, how some men, probably, abstain from murder because they fear that if they committed murder they would be hanged…hundreds of thousands abstain from it because they regard it with horror (Haag 1986, 4). If an individual refrains from committing homicide, fewer lives may be …show more content…
If an individual commits a lethal act, the punishment should be appropriate to the crime. For example, retribution requires a proportion between the gravity of the crime and the severity of the punishment (Barr 2010, 3). When a person faces death through the criminal justice system; justice is restored. If the citizens do not resign offenders to their destiny, then there is an apparent imbalance. Some believe Capital punishment is a retributive measure, a way of giving a person a taste of his own medicine while satisfying our deepest instincts for justice (Blecker 2013, 2). These individuals tend to go by the notion if one kills another, that person should face the death sentence. For instance, following the Code of Hammurabi’s diorama of “an eye for an eye”, “it is apparent that real justice requires people to suffer from their wrongdoing, and to suffer in a way appropriate for the crime” (BBC 2014, 1). To many individuals, retribution is not truly served unless the offender receives the ideal amount of torture. Through the death penalty being implemented in numerous of states, retribution has been enabled as a balancing tool between the offender and victim/s. Nevertheless, despite the supposed justice being served to criminals, the standpoint on retribution can alter when the alleged criminal being sentenced to death is innocent. Many cases where suspected criminals are sentenced
Many argue that the Death penalty functions as a specific and general deterrence in society. For instance, general deterrence aims to make the individual aware of similar consequences occurring if he or she were to commit a similar offense (Fuller 2014, 20). Whereas, specific deterrence focuses on preventing the perpetrator itself from recidivating, due to understanding the consequences of having that behavior (Fuller 2014, 20). It is argued that one fears death and would rather face a life sentence in prison than Capital punishment. This allegedly is the reason why those who deviate lessen the severity of their offense to avoid the Death penalty. A professor at Fordham University states his belief in, how some men, probably, abstain from murder because they fear that if they committed murder they would be hanged…hundreds of thousands abstain from it because they regard it with horror (Haag 1986, 4). If an individual refrains from committing homicide, fewer lives may be …show more content…
If an individual commits a lethal act, the punishment should be appropriate to the crime. For example, retribution requires a proportion between the gravity of the crime and the severity of the punishment (Barr 2010, 3). When a person faces death through the criminal justice system; justice is restored. If the citizens do not resign offenders to their destiny, then there is an apparent imbalance. Some believe Capital punishment is a retributive measure, a way of giving a person a taste of his own medicine while satisfying our deepest instincts for justice (Blecker 2013, 2). These individuals tend to go by the notion if one kills another, that person should face the death sentence. For instance, following the Code of Hammurabi’s diorama of “an eye for an eye”, “it is apparent that real justice requires people to suffer from their wrongdoing, and to suffer in a way appropriate for the crime” (BBC 2014, 1). To many individuals, retribution is not truly served unless the offender receives the ideal amount of torture. Through the death penalty being implemented in numerous of states, retribution has been enabled as a balancing tool between the offender and victim/s. Nevertheless, despite the supposed justice being served to criminals, the standpoint on retribution can alter when the alleged criminal being sentenced to death is innocent. Many cases where suspected criminals are sentenced