Just Deserts: A Platter of Bullshit
Ever since the implementation of the English justice system
in this country there has been consequences attached to behaviors that are
deemed as inappropriate, these consequences have allegedly evolved into a
standard of being reasonable and suited to the particular criminal act. However, within the last thirty years the
sanctions have turned into a formal procedure that brings prominence and political
righteousness to the people who are involved with the distribution of justice. For example, the harsh Rockefeller Laws and over-the-top
fines and surcharges for petty crimes or violations have risen to the point that
expounds how the justice system seems to be focusing more on economics and personal
prosperity rather than adhering to the Just Deserts theory, or even truth in
action (the propaganda of the criminal justice system). This recent trend demonstrates the actual reasons
behind convictions or adjudication processes and posits the idea that the
practitioners are participating in specific actions in the wrong manner, a
seeking of a monetary and personal compensation as opposed to justice.
Some may argue that high-priced sanctions and other strict penalties deter offenders from committing an illegal act again, however, the statistics, mentality of the offender, and overwhelmed justice system disprove this theory and perpetuate the negligence within the entire criminal justice system. An easy understanding of this can be explained by posing a question: With many citizens entering the system and then being convicted/fined daily, which one of them can be described as the standard of the deterrence example? Also, with the abundance of offenders entering the system, where is the deterrence? Suggesting that the retribution or sanctions take on a personal and general deterrence to offenders has no plausible inclination because of the general parameters that are imposed in our legal system (obligation of imposing authentic laws and their punishments by the criminal justice professionals). This is hypocrisy in deterrence philosophies.
Lastly, if the Just Deserts theory actually implemented its reasonableness upon offenders the thought about how an offender thinks of this punishment theory is necessary to consider. Meaning that every offender is not the same and that some may not find the adjudication sufficient or proper, an example can be shown with a wealthy person paying a fine for an illegal act (if they have wealth then most likely the theory of deterrence goes out the window), or an indigent person that could care less about fines or terms of incarceration. Notice the type of offender and form of punishment mentioned.
Some may argue that high-priced sanctions and other strict penalties deter offenders from committing an illegal act again, however, the statistics, mentality of the offender, and overwhelmed justice system disprove this theory and perpetuate the negligence within the entire criminal justice system. An easy understanding of this can be explained by posing a question: With many citizens entering the system and then being convicted/fined daily, which one of them can be described as the standard of the deterrence example? Also, with the abundance of offenders entering the system, where is the deterrence? Suggesting that the retribution or sanctions take on a personal and general deterrence to offenders has no plausible inclination because of the general parameters that are imposed in our legal system (obligation of imposing authentic laws and their punishments by the criminal justice professionals). This is hypocrisy in deterrence philosophies.
Lastly, if the Just Deserts theory actually implemented its reasonableness upon offenders the thought about how an offender thinks of this punishment theory is necessary to consider. Meaning that every offender is not the same and that some may not find the adjudication sufficient or proper, an example can be shown with a wealthy person paying a fine for an illegal act (if they have wealth then most likely the theory of deterrence goes out the window), or an indigent person that could care less about fines or terms of incarceration. Notice the type of offender and form of punishment mentioned.
Comments
Post a Comment