Retribution vs. Rehabilitation as Aims of Punishment

This page presents a practice question discussing retribution and rehabilitation as aims of sentencing in criminology.

Retribution focuses on punishing offenders for their crimes, often through prison sentences or, in some jurisdictions, the death penalty. It aims to inflict punishment proportional to the offense, following the principle of "an eye for an eye." Retribution aligns with right realist criminology, which posits that offenders rationally choose to commit crimes and should face consequences.

Definition: Retribution in criminology refers to the idea that punishment should be proportional to the crime committed, serving as a form of justice.

Rehabilitation, on the other hand, seeks to change offenders' behavior and help them recognize their wrongdoing. It may involve various approaches:

1. Aversion therapy (based on Eysenck's individualistic theory)
2. Education programs in prison to develop social and vocational skills
3. Addressing root causes of crime, such as poverty and unemployment (linked to left realist criminology)

Example: Carpentry programs in prisons aim to provide offenders with employable skills, reducing the likelihood of reoffending upon release.

The essay discusses criticisms of both approaches. Rehabilitation programs may not always prevent reoffending, and their effectiveness can vary. Retribution faces challenges in determining proportional punishment, which can be subjective and lead to inconsistent sentencing for similar crimes.

Highlight: The debate between retribution and rehabilitation reflects broader discussions in criminology about the aims of punishment, including deterrence, protection, and justice.

Imprisonment for Public Protection and Mandatory Sentencing

This page discusses the use of imprisonment as a means of public protection and the implementation of mandatory minimum sentences for repeat offenders in the UK and US.

Imprisonment has become the primary method of protecting society from offenders in modern times. The Criminal Justice Act 1991 introduced mandatory minimum sentences in the UK for certain offenses. For example, a Class A drug trafficking offense carries a minimum 7-year sentence, while a third domestic burglary conviction results in a minimum 3-year sentence.

In the US, "three strikes" laws were introduced in the 1990s, mandating long prison terms for repeat offenders. These laws can result in life sentences for a third serious offense, regardless of its severity.

Example: Jerry Williams received a 25-year sentence for stealing a pizza slice under California's three strikes law.

The page also touches on biological theories of crime, such as Lombroso's idea that criminals are biologically different and cannot be rehabilitated. Right realist criminologists argue that a small number of persistent offenders are responsible for most crime, supporting containment strategies.

Highlight: Criticisms of public protection through imprisonment include the "warehousing" of offenders with little hope of release and rising prison populations leading to increased costs.

Vocabulary: Recidivism refers to the tendency of convicted criminals to reoffend.