Flash Reflections Are Assignments That Help You To Better Un ✓ Solved

Flash reflections are assignments that help you to better u

Flash reflections are assignments that help you to better understand the material. Flash reflections are included in this course work to get you thinking about how the issues and information presented in the course might apply to the real-world. Responses should contain sufficient detail to both show your understanding of the material and answer all the questions posed. Refer specifically to the assigned videos and readings in your responses. Watch and consider the videos assigned to date in light of the course readings and answer the following questions about them: Describe your personal thoughts on when society is justified in punishing an offender. Identify which rationale for punishment most closely aligns with your own viewpoint on the goal of punishment in society and explain how this view fits with your own. Of the rationales for punishment, which do you think is the most practical (e.g. feasible and useful) for the Criminal Justice System? Give the rationale for your choice (your choice can be different from the one that most aligns with your personal viewpoint). 300 WORD MINIMUM!!!!

Paper For Above Instructions

The discourse surrounding punishment in society is a complex and multifaceted issue that is deeply rooted in philosophical, ethical, and practical considerations. Throughout the course, various theories and rationales of punishment have been examined, illuminating the nuances of societal responses to deviance and crime. My personal thoughts on when society is justified in punishing an offender center around the principles of justice and social order. I believe that punishment should be administered when it serves to uphold the rule of law and protect the rights of individuals within the community. For instance, punishment becomes a necessary response when an offender poses a threat to public safety or when crimes violate the social contract that binds individuals within a society (Duff, 2001).

Personally, I align most closely with the retributive theory of punishment, which posits that punishment is justified as a form of moral compensation for wrongdoing. According to this view, offenders deserve to face consequences that are proportionate to the harm they have inflicted. This perspective resonates with my belief in accountability; that individuals must take responsibility for their actions. The retributive approach, which entails a focus on intent and culpability, echoes the legal maxim of 'an eye for an eye,' signifying that moral balance must be restored when someone inflicts harm on another (Alexander, 2008). This perspective aligns with my values regarding fairness and justice, where punishment serves not merely as a deterrent but also as a means of re-establishing equilibrium in the moral fabric of society.

However, while my personal beliefs lean towards retributive justice, I also recognize the importance of the utilitarian rationale in the practical application of punishment within the criminal justice system. Utilitarianism advocates for punishment as a means to promote the greater good, focusing on the outcomes and societal benefits rather than solely on the act of retribution. This rationale emphasizes deterrence and rehabilitation as key components of effective punishment (Davis, 2003). In the context of a criminal justice system burdened by recidivism and societal concerns, a utilitarian approach may indeed be the most practical. By emphasizing correctional strategies that aim to rehabilitate offenders rather than purely punish them, the system can address the root causes of criminal behavior, reduce future offenses, and ultimately create safer communities (Tonry, 1996).

In conclusion, while I firmly believe in the moral grounds for retributive punishment when justice is violated, the utilitarian approach may offer a more effective and feasible framework for the contemporary criminal justice system. It is essential that the system evolves to meet society's needs by blending retributive principles with the pragmatic aspects of rehabilitation and deterrence. As we delve deeper into the complexities of punishment, it is imperative to engage with these theories critically, appreciating the interplay of ethics and practicality in enforcing justice (Cavadino & Dignan, 2006).

References

  • Alexander, M. (2008). The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness. The New Press.
  • Cavadino, M., & Dignan, J. (2006). Sentencing and the Penal System. SAGE Publications.
  • Davis, M. (2003). Are Prisons Obsolete? Seven Stories Press.
  • Duff, R. A. (2001). Punishment, Communication, and Community. Oxford University Press.
  • Tonry, M. (1996). Sentencing Matters. Oxford University Press.
  • von Hirsch, A. (1993). Censure and Sanctions. Oxford University Press.
  • Beccaria, C. (1963). On Crimes and Punishments. Bobbs-Merrill.
  • Rawls, J. (1971). A Theory of Justice. Harvard University Press.
  • Hirsch, A. V. (2011). The Philosophy of Punishment. University of California Press.
  • Garland, D. (2001). The Culture of Control: Crime and Social Order in Contemporary Society. University of Chicago Press.

Related Assignments