General Deterrence: The Evolution Of Punishment

The evolution of punishment practices with time has been influenced by the underlying justification for the punishment: namely utilitarian, retributivist, or a combination of the two. The concept of general deterrence utilizes the threat of punishment to deter society from crime, and the reasoning behind punishment based on those grounds will be examined in this essay. Rehabilitation rationale will also be analyzed to highlight the respective strength of general deterrence and retribution in offenders receiving the punishment they deserve. The utilitarian and rational strengths associated with the threat of punishment makes general deterrence the most convincing utilitarian justification; however, general deterrence alone may give rise to a system in which punishment is not certain or just, necessitating the retributivist establishment of culpability and the reduction of unfair advantages. Since the Enlightenment, the practice of punishment has revolved around the twin cores of rationality and utilitarianism, and the necessity in making the perceived costs of crime not worth …show more content…
General deterrence theory alone does not guarantee the certainty of punishment, because it is solely focused on providing disincentives to society to commit crime. This uncertainty confers ambiguous standards for punishment and, if revealed to the public, could lead to collapse of the criminal justice system. In fact, general deterrence theory could potentially justify no punishment or punishment in only select situations, as long as the public remains oblivious (Lacey 1994: 29). However, the "unfair advantages" view of retributivist theory may balance with general deterrence and restore certainty of punishment through the infliction of punishment to re-establish moral