Can you help me understand this English question?
Respond to these 3 posts. Don’t forget to use sources.
Post 1: Sentencing Philosophies
“Gaines & Miller (2019), identify the five sentencing philosophies as retribution, deterrence, incapacitation, rehabilitation, and restorative justice.
First, is retribution. Retribution is the oldest and most usual form of punishment in which society believes a person who commits a crime should be punished equal to the seriousness of the crime (Gaines & Miller, 2019).
Second, is deterrence. Deterrence is an attempt to use the criminal as an example to prevent further crimes from happening by others and a way to convince a criminal they should not commit further crimes (Gaines & Miller, 2019).
Third, is incapacitation. The purpose of incapacitation is to incarcerate criminals to keep them from committing any further crimes and to separate them from society (Gaines & Miller, 2019).
Fourth, is rehabilitation. Rehabilitation is the philosophy that intervention by providing resources to remove the offender out of their situation would possibly stop them from reoffending (Gaines & Miller, 2019).
Finally, is restorative justice. Restorative justice is focused more on the victim and community where the crime was committed (Gaines & Miller, 2019). The theory of this approach is to have the offender give back to the victim or community by way of apology or restitution (Gaines & Miller, 2019).
I feel that each form of punishment has its pros and cons. I think to determine to most effective or ineffective form to be used needs to be considered on a case by case basis. For example, the severity of the crime, the offender, and the victim should all take into account to reach a form of punishment that best fits the situation.”
Post 2: Sentencing Disparity and Sentencing Discrimination
“Sentencing disparity can be described as a lack of consistency in punishments for comparable crimes. There are many reasons this occurs.
One reason sentence disparity is caused by how judges view the seriousness of certain crimes (Sentencing disparity, 2020). For example, one judge may have the opinion that larceny cases are more serious than drug cases; therefore, that judge may decide on a stronger punishment for a stealing offense. Another reason that is a cause of sentence disparity is the inconsistency of punishments amongst judges for similar crimes (Sentencing disparity, 2020).
One way to correct sentence disparity would be to have a small panel of judges hear the facts of the case. An option that may help with sentence and punishment reform could be the creation of a panel of judges from different jurisdictions. The panel of judges would hear the facts and evidence related to the case; however, they would not be given the names, sex, or gender of the defendant or the victim and they would have to agree on a punishment for the crime based only off that information.”
Post 3: Death Penalty
“When it comes to the death penalty society has vastly different opinions. I agree with the death penalty; however, I do not think it is the right punishment for all crimes. As I stated in another discussion post to determine the penalty for a crime committed there are many factors that should be taken into consideration.
I feel the death penalty is appropriate for the offenders that are responsible for murder. I am not referring to those that have caused the death of another recklessly or negligently and have been found guilty or entered a plea of guilty for, what is known in Missouri, as involuntary or voluntary manslaughter. I am referring to murder first degree, an offender that intentionally and knowingly takes the life of another. If a person can take the time to calculate a plan and make the decision to take the life of another person then I do not feel they should continue to live their life.
I do understand that this may not bring closure to the families of the deceased victims, but it does protect society.
I also agree with The National Conference of State Legislatures in an article titled States and Capital Punishment (2020):
The court has abolished the death penalty for mentally disabled offenders (Atkins v. Virginia, 2002), juvenile offenders (Roper v. Simmons, 2005), and for those convicted of raping a child where death was not the intended or actual result (Kennedy v. Louisiana, 2008) – each ruling states that the execution of such individuals is unconstitutional, violating cruel and unusual punishment. (States and capital punishment, 2020). I think alternative forms of punishment should be used for the offenders that fall into those categories.”