Theories of punishment

Hello,

In order to comprehend which theory or punishment is the most suitable one with reference to today’s world lets go through the evolution of all these theories and why certain theories were considered apt at certain times.

With the rise of crime, the necessity of punishment came into light. Punishment became the fundamental mean of averting crime. Crime being inevitable gave way to punishment being inevitable. But the term punishment in itself has a wide scope.

Many great Minds analysed and studied on the various aspects pertaining ,influencing and understanding the parameters of punishment.

There have been numerous discussions to comprehend what actually punishment stood for in this society. Whether it was a symbol of protection or an epitome of condemnation or a bit of both. It was important to understand the very essence of punishment.

There are 4 major theories of punishment. They are the deterrent theory, retributive theory, preventive theory, and reformative theory. 

Deterrent theory 

The deterrence theory of punishment can be traced to the early works of classical philosophers such as Thomas Hobbes (1588–1678), Cesare Beccaria (1738–1794), and Jeremy Bentham (1748–1832). Together, these theorists protested against the legal policies that had dominated European thought for more than a thousand years, and against the spiritu- alistic explanations of crime on which they were founded. In addition, these social contract thinkers provided the foundation for modern deterrence theory in criminology.

As per this theory punishments are assigned in order to educate the wrong doers. Here punishment is used as a mode to get through to wrong doers , it an attempt made to trigger introspection within the wrong doer.

This theory suggests that punishments are awarded in order to deter future crime.

Thomas Hobbes stated that The deterrence theory of punishment can be traced to the early works of classical philosophers such as Thomas Hobbes (1588–1678), Cesare Beccaria (1738–1794), and Jeremy Bentham (1748–1832). Together, these theorists protested against the legal policies that had dominated European thought for more than a thousand years, and against the spiritu- alistic explanations of crime on which they were founded. In addition, these social contract thinkers provided the foundation for modern deterrence theory in criminology.

Cesare Beccaria asserted that jails should be more humane and the law should not distinguish between the rich and the poor. Judges should determine guilt and the application of the law, rather than the spirit of the law. Legislators should pass laws that define crimes and they must provide specific punishments for each crime.

Retributive theory

The retributive theory is based on the contention that when a crime is committed, punishments are assigned to give the aggrieved or injured a sense of revenge or retribution.

Retribution is based on the concept of lex talionis—that is, the law of retaliation. At its core is the principle of equal and direct retribution, as expressed in Exodus 21:24 as “an eye for an eye.” Destroying the eye of a person of equal social standing meant that one’s own eye would be put out. Some penalties designed to punish culpable behaviour by individuals were specifically tied to outlawed acts. Branders who used their skills to remove slave 

It is based on the theory that who injured, must also be injured in some way.

It is the most widely accepted rationale for punishment. If convicted, the sentence a defendant receives is always, at least in part, a form of retribution.

This theory is however subject to a lot of criticism as “eye for an eye can make the whole world blind”.

Preventive theory

As per the preventive theory of punishment, the wrong doer is ought to be punished to further prevent the him/her from committing a crime in the future.

“The fear of acts which disrupt social equilibrium has inspired the imposition of punishment by those who have the power to establish and enforce the desired standards of conduct.”

-Joel Meyer,

This theory contends that the fear of punishment can influence one to not commit a wrongful act.

The law threatens certain pains if you do certain things, intending thereby to give you a new motive for not doing them. If you persist in doing them, it has to inflict the pains in order that its threats may continue to be believed.

Justice Holmes stated that As the name suggests that the preventive theory of punishment aims at preventing prospective crimes by disabling the criminal. 

Reformative theory

The reformative theory is Based on the contention that, the wrongdoer is to be punished in order to reform the wrong doer. Reformative theory considers punishment to be curative more than to be deterrent.

Here crime is considered as a disease that requires treatment. Adequate Punishment is deemed as the treatment to the disease. This theory also gives due importance to the “why” of crime. Reforming the wrong doer is considered more important than inflicting fear upon him/her.

In my honest opinion the preventive theory makes the most sense in today’s world with the increasing rate of crime and the diversified ways in which the criminals operate today, I know looking at the bigger picture deterrence makes more sense but then if you could at least save one individual from being harmed by creating a sense of fear in the wrong doer it might even mean that person’s life is safe because the wrong doer thought of the consequences he was likely to face after committing such crime. Because having innocent people face crimes for the greater good of the society in the future doesn’t make sense whereas maximizing the efforts to save every individual makes more sense.

Thank you

What are the facts? What is the context?