NCJ Number
58193
Journal
Criminal Law Review Dated: (MARCH 1979) Pages: 129-144
Date Published
1979
Length
16 pages
Annotation
DEFINITIONAL PROBLEMS AND STUDIES RELATED TO CRIMINAL DETERRENCE AS BOTH A THEORY AND GUIDING PRINCIPLE OF JUSTICE ARE DISCUSSED IN THIS BRITISH REVIEW.
Abstract
DETERRENCE CAN BE FAIRLY SIMPLY DEFINED AS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN ONE OR MORE PEOPLE REFRAIN FROM SOME ACTIVITY ON ONE OR MORE OCCASIONS BECAUSE THEY FEAR THE CONSEQUENCES. THREE POINTS NEED TO BE MADE; (1) THEY CAN BE NATURAL (SUCH AS THE CONSEQUENCE OF PUTTING ONE'S HAND INTO FLAMES) OR INTENDED (E.G., THE DAMAGE CAUSED BY BARBED WIRE), (2) THEY MAY BE IMMEDIATE OR DELAYED (BOTH BARBED WIRE AND LUNG CANCER ARE DETERRENTS), AND (3) THEY MAY BE OFFICIALLY PRESCRIBED (AS IMPRISONMENT IS) OR UNOFFICIALLY APPLIED (AS LYNCHING IS). A NUMBER OF ARGUMENTS NEED TO BE MADE REGARDING THE ROLE OF DETERRENCE IN CORRECTIONAL POLICY, IT IS ACCEPTANCE BY THE PUBLIC, AND ITS EFFECTS ON OFFENDERS. THE EXISTING PREJUDICES AGAINST DETERRENTS IS DUE TO THEIR HISTORICAL ASSOCIATION WITH PENALTIES WHICH EXCEED WHAT ARE NOW REGARDED AS HUMANITARIAN LIMITS. FURTHER, THEIR ALLEGED ASSOCIATION WITH THE PRESERVATION OF THE POLITICAL STATUS QUO IS NONSENSE, AND OBJECTIONS TO THEM BASED ON THE ASSUMPTION OF THEIR INEFFECTIVENESS ARE TOO SWEEPING. THE MORAL OBJECTION THAT DETERRENTS COMPULSORILY SACRIFICE OFFENDERS' WELFARE TO THE WELFARE OF OTHERS IGNORES THE EXTENT TO WHICH SOCIETIES DEMAND COMPULSORY SACRIFICES FROM NONOFFENDERS. THE KANTIAN OBJECTION THAT OFFENDERS BE DEALT WITH AS RATIONAL ACTORS COGNIZANT OF THE LAW ACTUALLY SUPPORTS THE USE OF DETERRENTS IN SOME CASES; THE KANTIAN OBJECTION CAN BE SUSTAINED ONLY BY ONE WHO BELIEVES THAT THE ONLY JUSTIFICATION FOR PENALTIES IS TO IMPOSE APPROPRIATE PUNISHMENT. REFERENCES ARE PROVIDED. (KBL)