The Just Desert Theory and Other Views on Punishments - Term Paper Example

The Just desert model suggests that retribution justifies punishment because individuals deserve what they received for past deeds. Under the just desert theory the punishment should be the same for all people who commit the same crime. But the idea is that does just desert punishments stops the offenders to repeat it again Has it created the peace balance in the society and is it beneficial for us in general Is the Punishment based on deterrence or incapacitation wrong In a research (Kevin M.

Carlsmith and John M. Darley and Paul H. Robinson; Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 2002, Vol. 83, No. 2, 284-299) they came to know people are in favor of deterrence at macro level, but when it comes to individuals, people favor just desert because they consider it right and wrong doers deserve it. "The task of a just deserts theorist, then, is to assess the magnitude of the harm and to devise a punishment that is proportionate in severity, if not in kind. Kant (1952) recommended censure proportionate to a perpetrator's "internal wickedness," a quantity that may be approximated by society's sense of moral outrage over the crime".

After researching for quite sometime, I came to know that many are in favor of just desert. They suggest that just desert results in social Control. When there are established criminal justice punishments in society and people know the degrees of punishment they will have to suffer if they committed any wrong deeds, people tend to think before doing anything. Because they are aware of retribution, and they know that punishment will be same for all levels of people without being bias, they feel just and are less likely to commit serious crimes.

But some argue that being blind to class difference doesn't lead towards just. Ehrlich (1938: 363) pointed out that the more the rich and poor are dealt with according to the same legal propositions, the more the advantage of the rich is increased'. Galanter (1975: 363) puts it more beautifully. "The sailor over board and the shark are both swimmers, but only one is in the swimming business". Geertz (1983: 217) says that "there are number of facts about the way the world works, mostly facts about the distribution of power, which prevent punishment being imposed on the most deserving of it.

A policy of attempting punishment of all those who deserve it (and who can be caught) has the effect of increasing injustice, worsening tendencies to punish most where desert is least. This is because for the tendency for the law to be 'the most powerful where least needed, a sprinkler system that turns off when the fire gets too hot'." Some argue that the theory is fair to the offender if the punishment fits the crime; same punishment of all offenders for the same crime, etc which give people the sense of just.

People know that it does not authorize selecting a criminal for particularly cruel punishment by random drawing, even if this would expend fewer overall social resources than imposing lower and proportionate punishment on all similar offenders, which is referred to as the consequentiality theory. Another benefit is that in just desert, people are punished according to the seriousness of the crime.