4 ms·
I am a firm believer in deterrence, which you seem to be describing. It's a seperate thing from punitive justice which has a focus on retribution. The method is
by zappchance 3y ago
I am a firm believer in deterrence, which you seem to be describing. It's a seperate thing from punitive justice which has a focus on retribution. The method is similar but the aim is different (deterrence focuses on making the cost-benefit ratio for crimes very high, while retribution is mainly to satisfy the human need for fairness through punishment).
- brutusborn 3y agoIs there any real practical difference? Sounds like the only real change is how you frame the ‘punishment’/‘deterrance’
- vidarh 3y agoIt has a difference because if your goal is deterrence, then if it can be shown that other means of deterrence are better, then it is logical to apply those even if they reduce the apparent punishment, while if your goal is punishment you might want to keep punishing people even if it is shown to not be effective. See e.g. the debates over lenient prisons in Scandinavia such as Bastøy Prison, where the lenient treatment is seen as justified on a deterrence and recidivism basis but which would be seen as negative if you see the goal of the sentencing to be harsh in order to punish.