deterrence

• DETERRENCE (KU)

  • the action of discouraging an action or event through instilling doubt or fear of the consequences.
• DETERRENCE (KU)

  
  

  Deterrence is a way of using punishment to stop people from committing crimes. The idea is that if someone knows they will be punished if they commit a crime, they will be less likely to do it. The overall goal of deterrence is to prevent crime by making people aware of the consequences of their actions.
• ISSUE : Critics of deterrence argue that the primary goal of punishment should be rehabilitation and societal reintegration, rather than simply deterring future criminal behaviour.
• ISSUES WITH DETERRENCE: It assumes that all offenders are rational actors who weigh up the costs and benefits of potential actions. However, some individuals may not consider the risks associated with breaking the law due to factors such as addiction, mental health issues, or impulsivity.
• DETERRENCE (KU)

  This could be achieved by harsh prison conditions and very severe punishments. If this works, it should lower the crime rate as people will be put off committing crimes. Ultimately, this results in fewer victims and also means the prison population, which is currently overcrowded, would fall and prison expenses could be spent elsewhere.
• RELIGIOUS RESPONSE (CHRISTIAN)

  Romans 13:4: "If you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain."

  • Supposed to put people off committing crimes or disobeying God by putting the fear of God's wrath into them.

  ANALYSIS

  • Consequence: this is not in keeping with the teachings of Jesus who taught love and forgiveness.
  • Implication: justified as if you disobey God or harm his creation, you should take the harsh punishment that comes alongside it.
• RELIGIOUS RESPONSE (CHRISTIAN)

  • Christianity would say that whilst punishment needs to be given, for the most part, they would say these punishments should not be excessively harsh. 

  ANALYSIS

  • Consequence: The possibility that when punishments are not as harsh, criminals may think that they can re-offend as doubt is not successfully installed in them.
• MORAL ISSUE

  There’s no good way of checking just how much crime would have happened if people hadn’t been put off by the deterrence value of punishments or seeing what happened to others. 
• RELIGIOUS RESPONSE

  Christians believe that everyone is entitled to fair treatment – even the criminal, and so it would be wrong to use them as an example of what might happen to others. 
• RELIGIOUS RESPONSE

  • A Buddhist might be quite comfortable with the idea of deterrence in one way. 
  • Buddhism is based on the relationship between your actions and the consequences of those actions. 
• NON RELIGIOUS VIEW

  • A Utilitarian would argue that if deterrence works then it’s a good reason for punishment because it will protect the majority by putting the minority (of criminals) off crime because they don’t want to suffer the consequences. 
• NON RELIGIOUS VIEW

  In the case of deterrence, it does meet someone as a means to an end. If you punish someone harshly to put another person off committing a crime, you are using them as a means to an end so Kantians would be against it.