Proper Way to Deal With Criminal Offenders

Sentencing Philosphy

Sentencing Philosophy

The proper way to deal with criminals has always been something that has vexed and frustrated people on one level or another. To be sure, the idea of punishing someone for their misdeeds is not foreign to most people and indeed this is inculcated into youth from a very young age. There is also the need to protect the public from behavior that is violent or at least very damaging to others or their property. Beyond that, there is also the concern about rehabilitating people and getting them to enter society again with a better head on their shoulders and without a perceived need to commit more crimes. While pointing to a singular purpose for criminal punishment and sentencing is fleeting, a broad-based approach that deals with punishment for misdeeds, public safety and rehabilitation.

Analysis

Asking different people what the central purpose or purposes of criminal sentencing will certainly yield different responses depending on who is asked and the unique perspectives of that person. However, they will surely usually focus on one or more than one of the three items mentioned in the introduction. Criminal punishment often used to center on simply jailing the offender for a predetermined amount of time and then cutting them loose. However, there has been a stratospheric increase in the use of non-prison techniques such probation and parole. With both, convicted criminals avoid at least some of a jail sentence they did or could have received with the condition that subsequent behavior will not be a repeat of what happened before. Quite often, this works out fairly well but the recidivism rate can be quite high for certain offenses and/or for certain demographics.

Regarding what the scholarly literature says about this subject, several themes are readily apparent. One such perspective points out that crime is in large part a side effect and creation of society and thus this should guide how and when people are punished for crimes. As such, the other side of that proverbial coin is that society should craft punishment that has its sole main goal as being rehabilitation and not just being punitive. To be sure, the forum used for rehabilitation may indeed separate someone from society and may also be deemed to be punitive based on the form it takes. However, the main focus should be addressing the problem point or points that caused the issue such as poverty or low skills thus preparing the person for a better life when they have their restrictions removed (Stella, 2001). Another scholarly source, written about seven years prior, focused specifically on Minnesota sentencing guidelines but still focused on the purpose of criminal punishment. It was found in Minnesota that the amount of discretion and flexibility as compared to sentencing guidelines revealed that the peak sentence caps were somewhat regimented but the same was not true for lower limits for all crime types. In other words, maximum sentencing structures were not exceeded a lot but the same was not true for minimum sentencing (Frase, 1994).