The idea is to make the probability of arrest and conviction high as well as the punishment severe enough to make the would-be criminal think twice before committing the act. These three elements are supposed to deter crime, but according to Mendes and McDonald, 2001, though the arrest and conviction probability is a strong deterrent, the severity of punishment plays a much lesser role in decisions. When deterrence is used for justification of punishment then the crime is looked at as a social disruption that society must act upon in order to control. If most people thought alike then deterrence would be more effective than it is now, because even though some people are deterred there are others who do not consider the punishment enough to prevent them from their deviant
Prison time may be no worse for some people than the way they already live and therefore ineffective as a form of deterrence. People who cannot afford legal support have very minimal access to the legal system. An innocent person may be incarcerated only because they could not afford a suitable legal defence, this along with the theory of “school of crime” means that law abiding members of the community will become criminals through a forced exposure to real criminals. Instead of reducing future crime and recidivism, imprisonment is actually creating more offenders from once law-abiding citizens. The principle basis for a mandatory minimum sentence is the belief that the length of time in prison is a deterrent to future recidivism.
b. Thesis statement: Legislation should focus on education and prevention since both methods are more effective than incarceration for youth offenders. c. Main points: i. Current practices of treating youth offenders as adults are not effective. ii. Treating youth offenders at the community level with education is a more effective way to reduce violent crime.
For example the large basins where homeless people used to bathe were replaced by smaller basins, making it harder for them to abuse this property. However the situational crime prevention method is criticised for only being effective when focused on petty opportunistic crime, and also for assuming that deviants make a rational decision prior to their act. Situational crime prevention is also criticised for failing to reduce crime, but simply displacing it. This is done through 4 ways: changing the space where the crime is committed, committing the crime at a different time, changing the target, or by committing a different type of crime. Another approach for crime prevention is environmental crime prevention.
They have no doubt that the occurrence of crimes will experience a significant decline since the juveniles will be able to realize the negative impacts of their unethical or illegal actions (Siegel, 2011). Thus, instead of minimizing the role of juvenile justice in imposing the necessary penalties for young offenders, the punitive approach advocates that the role has to be recognized, approved and broadened. However, as I already mentioned I do not really believe that the punitive approach will really work. This is why I prefer to use the rehabilitative approach in dealing with juvenile crimes. I agree with the premise behind the rehabilitative approach, and this is the premise that punishment can only suppress negative actions but is not effective in completely altering it.
In addition to facing the stark reality of our mistaken reliance on longer sentences as a deterrent, we also need to acknowledge that the kind of treatment criminals receive from the state can affect their subsequent conduct. In other words, some rehabilitation programs - inside and outside of prison walls - do work.” Georgia, a state traditionally known for tough sentences and tough judges, has instituted a program of ''intensive probation supervision'' as an alternative to incarceration. Preliminary reports indicate that the recidivism rate for offenders placed in this program is far lower than that of their counterparts who go to prison. Texas, New Hampshire and California have recently enacted similar programs. The rationale for these programs is partly fiscal - it costs far less to
Research has shown that juvenile offenders are more apt [Passive voice] to return to the justice system the more they are in contact with the system; therefore, interventions need to be different depending upon whether youth are classified [Passive voice] as low, medium or high risk. Furthermore, indicates keeping lower-risk youth out of detention and results in lower incidence of crime. The incomplete information was advised in the Missouri and Washington State prior assessments above for each individual. Each state’s classification system incorporates a matrix that is designed [Passive voice] to match the sanction with the level of control necessary to manage the risk (Missouri Juvenile Offender Risk Assessment, 2003). The purpose of the classification matrix is to suggest the presumptive sanction(s) for youth entering the juvenile justice system based on the seriousness of the present offense and the risk of continued delinquent behavior.
For example, it has new criteria for the transfer of Canadians convicted and imprisoned in a foreign country to serve the sentences. Also, it has stiffened punishments for youth criminals, allowing adult sentencing for certain cases, and put an end to house arrest for large range of crimes. I believe this will not help decrease the youth crime rate but actually contribute to an increase. Youths are not fully matured and are more prone to bad influences from the public. Their misbehaviors are likely to have been originated from childhood emotional traumas.
Therefore, if offenders are spared of prison, this could lead to 'private justice' - an idea mention by (Johnstone, 2004) whereby victims or the family of the victim(s) are left unsatisfied by the outcome which restorative justice has provided and feel the need to take revenge on the offender which may be violent (treating violence with violence). For example restorative justice promotes the idea of the offender being offered help and puts little emphasis on the idea of 'punishment'. On the other hand, one of Restorative justice's main aims is to improve society. It may be suggested that people who commit crime in the first place aren't considered to be completely 'sane' members of society compared with their law-abiding counter-parts. Therefore, by offering offenders help and support, it may prevent them from committing crimes in the future; helping make society a better place.
By the time the juveniles get released, they turn uneducated and offensive and commit more crimes, which further endanger the society and harm more innocent people. Therefore, transferring juveniles into adult prisons both will ruin juveniles’ whole lives and bring more dangers to the society. Adolescence is an important period of one’s whole life. Adolescents are very easy to be irritated and sometimes make a lot of mistakes. Rather than locking them up in adult prisons, people should pay more attention to rehabilitating and educating