Carrabine, E., Cox, P., Fussey, P, Hobbs, D. ,South, N., Thiel, D and Turton, J (2014)
Criminology: a sociological introduction (3rd ed.). London: Routledge. chapter 15 – Thinking
of Punishment
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/oct/14/man-who-drove-into-cyclists-
outside-parliament-jailed-for-life
What is the function of punishment? Does this change over time?
Philosophical justifications
- The purpose of punishment falls into 2 distinctive groups; reductivist and
retributivist
- Reductivist; the aim of punishment as the prevention of future crimes
- Retributivist; looking to the past to punish crimes already committed
- The CJS – both rationalities often uncomfortably coexist and tensions between the 2
perennially rise.
Reductivist principles pg296-
- Justifies punishment on the grounds of its alleged future consequences.
- Arguments are supported by the form of moral reasoning known as utilitarianism;
origins of this thinking can be found in the 5th century BC
- This moral theory famously advanced by Jeremy Bentham – he argued that moral
actions are those that produce the greatest happiness of the great number of
people.
- For punishment to reduce future crimes; the pain and unhappiness caused to the
offender must be outweighed by the avoidance of unpleasantness to other people in
the future – thus making punishment morally right from a utilitarian point of view.
- The avoidance of further crime can be achieved through a number of strategies:
Deterring potential criminals;
Reforming actual criminals; or by
Keeping actual or potential offenders out of circulation
Deterrence
296
- Crime can be discouraged through the public’s fear of the punishment they may
receive if they break the law.
- For Bentham and contemporary thinkers; distinction between individual and general
deterrence.
- Individual deterrence – occurs when someone finds the experience of punishment so
unpleasant that they never wish to repeat the infraction for fear of the
consequences.
Criminology: a sociological introduction (3rd ed.). London: Routledge. chapter 15 – Thinking
of Punishment
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/oct/14/man-who-drove-into-cyclists-
outside-parliament-jailed-for-life
What is the function of punishment? Does this change over time?
Philosophical justifications
- The purpose of punishment falls into 2 distinctive groups; reductivist and
retributivist
- Reductivist; the aim of punishment as the prevention of future crimes
- Retributivist; looking to the past to punish crimes already committed
- The CJS – both rationalities often uncomfortably coexist and tensions between the 2
perennially rise.
Reductivist principles pg296-
- Justifies punishment on the grounds of its alleged future consequences.
- Arguments are supported by the form of moral reasoning known as utilitarianism;
origins of this thinking can be found in the 5th century BC
- This moral theory famously advanced by Jeremy Bentham – he argued that moral
actions are those that produce the greatest happiness of the great number of
people.
- For punishment to reduce future crimes; the pain and unhappiness caused to the
offender must be outweighed by the avoidance of unpleasantness to other people in
the future – thus making punishment morally right from a utilitarian point of view.
- The avoidance of further crime can be achieved through a number of strategies:
Deterring potential criminals;
Reforming actual criminals; or by
Keeping actual or potential offenders out of circulation
Deterrence
296
- Crime can be discouraged through the public’s fear of the punishment they may
receive if they break the law.
- For Bentham and contemporary thinkers; distinction between individual and general
deterrence.
- Individual deterrence – occurs when someone finds the experience of punishment so
unpleasant that they never wish to repeat the infraction for fear of the
consequences.
