Editing Punishment (section)

==Possible reasons for punishment==
{{See also|Sociology of punishment|Criminal justice}}

There are many possible reasons that might be given to justify or explain why someone ought to be punished; here follows a broad outline of typical, possibly conflicting, justifications.

=== Deterrence ===
Two reasons given to justify punishment<ref name=justify/> is that it is a measure to prevent people from committing an offense - deterring previous offenders from re-offending, and preventing those who may be contemplating an offence they have not committed from actually committing it.  This punishment is intended to be sufficient that people would choose not to commit the crime rather than experience the punishment.  The aim is to deter everyone in the community from committing offences.

Some criminologists state that the number of people convicted for crime does not decrease as a result of more severe punishment and conclude that deterrence is ineffective.<ref>reference | J. Mitchell Miller | 2009 | 21st Century Criminology: A Reference Handbook</ref> Other criminologists object to said conclusion, citing that while most people do not know the exact severity of punishment such as whether the sentence for murder is 40 years or life, most people still know the rough outlines such as the punishments for armed robbery or forcible rape being more severe than the punishments for driving too fast or misparking a car. These criminologists therefore argue that lack of deterring effect of increasing the sentences for already severely punished crimes say nothing about the significance of the existence of punishment as a deterring factor.<ref>reference | Gennaro F. Vito, Jeffrey R. Maahs | 2015 | Criminology</ref><ref>reference | Frank E. Hagan | 2010 | Introduction to Criminology: Theories, Methods, and Criminal Behavior</ref>

Some criminologists argue that increasing the sentences for crimes can cause criminal investigators to give higher priority to said crimes so that a higher percentage of those committing them are convicted for them, causing statistics to give a false appearance of such crimes increasing. These criminologists argue that the use of statistics to gauge the efficiency of crime fighting methods are a danger of creating a reward hack that makes the least efficient criminal justice systems appear to be best at fighting crime, and that the appearance of deterrence being ineffective may be an example of this.<ref>reference | Anthony Walsh, Craig Hemmens | 2008 | Introduction to Criminology: A Text/Reader</ref><ref>Ronald L. Akers (2013). ''Criminological Theories: Introduction and Evaluation''</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.healthychildren.org/English/family-life/family-dynamics/communication-discipline/Pages/Disciplining-Your-Child.aspx|title = What's the Best Way to Discipline My Child?| date=5 November 2018 }}</ref>

=== Rehabilitation ===
{{Main|Rehabilitation (penology)}}
Some punishment includes work to reform and [[Rehabilitation (penology)|rehabilitate]] the culprit so that they will not commit the offence again.<ref name=justify/> This is distinguished from deterrence, in that the goal here is to change the offender's attitude to what they have done, and make them come to see that their behavior was wrong.

=== Incapacitation ===
{{Main|Incapacitation (penology)}}
Incapacitation as a justification of punishment<ref name=justify/> refers to the offender's ability to commit further offences being removed. Imprisonment separates offenders from the community, for example, Australia was a dumping ground for early British criminals. This was their way of removing or reducing the offenders ability to carry out certain crimes. The death penalty does this in a permanent (and irrevocable) way. In some societies, people who stole have been punished by having their hands amputated.

Crewe<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Crewe |first1=D |title=Punitiveness and Resentment |journal=Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Criminology |date=2021 |issue=13 |pages=64–91}}</ref> however, has pointed out that for incapacitation of an offender to work, it must be the case that the offender would have committed a crime had they not been restricted in this way. '''Should the putative offender not be going to commit further crimes, then they have not been incapacitated'''. The more heinous crimes such as murders have the lowest levels of recidivism and hence are the least likely offences to be subject to incapacitative effects. Antisocial behaviour and the like display high levels of recidivism and hence are the kind of crimes most susceptible to incapacitative effects. It is shown by life-course studies<ref>{{cite book |last1=Carlson |first1=C. |last2=Sarnecki |first2=J |title=An Introduction to Life-Course Criminology |date=2015 |publisher=Sage |location=London}}</ref> that long sentences for burglaries amongst offenders in their late teens and early twenties fail to incapacitate when the natural reduction in offending due to ageing is taken into account: the longer the sentence, in these cases, the less the incapacitative effect.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Crewe |first1=D. |title=Punitiveness and Resentment |journal=Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Criminology |date=2021 |issue=13 |pages=64–91}}</ref>

=== Retribution ===
{{Main|Retributive justice}}
Criminal activities typically give a benefit to the offender and a loss to the victim.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Sir William Draper|first=Junius|date=1772|title=Lettres|journal=Letters of Junius|pages=303–305}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last=D|first=Wittman|date=1974|title=Punishment as retribution|url=https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00136647|journal=Theory and Decision|volume=4|issue=3–4|pages=209–237|doi=10.1007/BF00136647|s2cid=153961464}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last=Blackwood|first=William|date=1830|title=The Southern Review. Vol. V. February and May, 1830.|journal=The Southern Review|location=Michigan State University|publisher=William Blackwood|volume=5|pages=871}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last=Raworth|first=John|date=1644|editor-last=Buchanan|editor-first=David|title=The Historie of the Reformation of the Church of Scotland Containing Five Books, Together with Some Treatises Conducing to the History|journal=|pages=358}}</ref> Punishment has been justified as a measure of [[retributive justice]],<ref name=justify/><ref>{{Cite journal|last=Falls|first=Margaret|date=April 1987|title=Retribution, Reciprocity, and Respect for Persons|journal=Law and Philosophy|volume=6|issue=1|pages=25–51|jstor=3504678|doi=10.1007/BF00142639|s2cid=144282576}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last=K. M.|first=Carlsmith|date=2006|title=The roles of retribution and utility in determining punishment.|journal=Journal of Experimental Social Psychology|volume=42|issue=4|pages=437–451|doi=10.1016/j.jesp.2005.06.007}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book|last=Popping|first=S.|title=True Passive Obedience Restor'd in 1710. In a Dialogue Between a Country-man and a True Patriot|publisher=S. Popping|year=1710|location=The British Library|pages=8}}</ref> in which the goal is to try to rebalance any unjust advantage gained by ensuring that the offender also suffers a loss. Sometimes viewed as a way of "getting even" with a wrongdoer—the suffering of the wrongdoer is seen as a desired goal in itself, even if it has no restorative benefits for the victim. One reason [[society|societies]] have administered punishments is to diminish the perceived need for retaliatory "street justice", [[blood feud]], and [[vigilante|vigilantism]].

=== Restoration ===
{{Main|Restorative justice}}
Especially applied to minor offenses, punishment may take the form of the offender "righting the wrong", or making restitution to the victim. [[Community service]] or compensation orders are examples of this sort of penalty.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.la-articles.org.uk/libertarian_restitution.htm |title=restitution |publisher=La-articles.org.uk |access-date=2012-08-27}}</ref>  In models of [[restorative justice]], victims take an ''active'' role in a process with their offenders who are encouraged to take responsibility for their actions, "to repair the harm they've done—by apologizing, returning stolen money, or community service."<ref>"A New Kind of Criminal Justice", ''Parade'', October 25, 2009, p. 6.</ref>  The restorative justice approach aims to help the offender want to avoid future offences.

=== Education and denunciation ===
[[File:Schwaebisch Hall pillory.jpg|thumb|upright|Gothic [[pillory]] (early 16th century) in [[Schwäbisch Hall]], Germany]]
Punishment can be explained by positive prevention theory to use the criminal justice system to teach people what are the social norms for what is correct, and acts as a reinforcement.

Punishment can serve as a means for society to publicly express denunciation of an action as being criminal. Besides educating people regarding what is not acceptable behavior, it serves the dual function of preventing vigilante justice by acknowledging public anger, while concurrently deterring future criminal activity by stigmatizing the offender.
This is sometimes called the "Expressive Theory" of denunciation.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.lexisnexis.com/lawschool/study/outlines/html/crim/crim01.htm |title=Theory, Sources, and Limitations of Criminal Law |access-date=2011-09-26}}
</ref>
The [[pillory]] was a method for carrying out public denunciation.{{citation needed|date=August 2022}}

Some critics of the education and denunciation model cite [[evolution]]ary problems with the notion that a feeling for punishment as a social signal system evolved if punishment was not effective. The critics argue that some individuals spending time and energy and taking risks in punishing others, and the possible loss of the punished group members, would have been selected against if punishment served no function other than signals that could evolve to work by less risky means.<ref>J. Robert Lilly, Francis T. Cullen, Richard A. Ball  (2014). ''Criminological Theory: Context and Consequences''</ref><ref>[[Tim Newburn]]  2017  ''Criminology''</ref>{{page needed|date=October 2021}}

=== Unified theory ===
A unified theory of punishment brings together multiple penal purposes—such as retribution, deterrence and rehabilitation—in a single, coherent framework. Instead of punishment requiring we choose between them, unified theorists argue that they work together as part of some wider goal such as the protection of rights.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.oxfordbibliographies.com/view/document/obo-9780195396577/obo-9780195396577-0094.xml |title=Thom Brooks on Unified Theory of Punishment |access-date=2014-09-03}}</ref>