Is The Criminal Justice System Effective In Deterring Crime In Presently In The United States?

Introduction

Over the last several years’ incarceration has risen drastically both on the state and federal levels. As the result of more punitive policies and harsher sentencing procedures, more than two million persons are incarcerated in the American prisons as U.S leads globally with the highest incarceration rate (Mallicoat 60). Incarceration and sentencing systems have conventionally had several goals which include punishment, rehabilitation, and deterrence. However, today the sentencing programs have always been implemented with the objective of improving deterrence influence of the criminal justice system. While the system as a whole provides certain effects of deterrence, the lack of uniformity among states has not only resulted in crimes and sentencing disparity but also turned the system to be ineffective (Mallicoat 60). This paper lobbies against the present view that the criminal justice system is currently effective in deterring crime due to the lack of uniformity, sentencing, and crime disparity.

Punishment does affect deterrence in a way or another. The lack uniformity among states is one of the leading force in regard to the rise of crimes. The present system needs to overhauled and have more uniformity across the nation. Based on research, it is demonstrated that punishment inevitability rather than the punishment harshness is more likely to generate deterrent benefits (Kennedy 316). To begin with, many states are pushing to abolish the death penalty. With this, it means that regardless of the crime’s severity the offenders will be subjected to a punishment that does not suit their crimes. This is, however, not pleasing since in the states where such laws that eliminate capital punishment are being emphasized this will be encouraging offenders to commit even heavier offenses to receive less severe penalties. With such laws, criminals feel they can continue to commit crimes of various degrees of severity with little to no reprimand. Sentencing disparity is one of the primary sources of the present system’s ineffectiveness. The system tends to lean on the person that has committed the crime rather than the severity (Kennedy 316). Crime and sentencing gap in America is a principal social and justice problem since those involved in less severe crimes have become the subject of incarceration while aggressive offenders are offered lenient to zero sentencing with bails.

Uniformity does not only mean that the laws should be modified collectively but also offenders should be charged as such based on the crimes that they commit that suit their respect to their offenses (Cole 6). It is the same trend that has resulted in the rise of sexual predators in the American education system because they seem to be getting lighter sentences than others who commit similar crimes. For most of the aggressive offenders such as white-collar criminals, all the related criminals are well accounted while considering the outcomes and the associated benefits of the penalty prior to deciding. Most of these crimes are usually charged with lenient sentences alongside bail despite the fact that they result in immeasurable damages which are both psychological and financial (Cole 6). On the other hand, minor crimes such as those that are considered to be aggressive even with minimal effects have led to extensive sentencing. It is at this point that rehabilitation and deterrence of the system fail as it appears to be encouraging injustices and offenders becomes more focused on retaliation (Cole 6).

Clearly, improving the severity of sentencing or criminal punishments is bound to have less effect on individuals who with no doubt believe that they will not be detained for their offenses (Fisher and Lab 279). Due to lighter sentences and penalties for severe crimes criminals feel that committing such crimes is less dangerous since they will receive more favorable penalties. In the current fight against crime, the system seems to be emphasizing more of sentencing severity which does not account for crimes discouragement. Based on research close to 50 percent of those arrested for severe crimes are repeat offenders and the fact that they are punished less severely might be the primary drive to their repeated misbehaviors (Cole 7). The system utilizes incarceration to keep people from engaging in crimes.

It is evident that capital punishment has low deterrence ability since it is not the severity of the crime that matters but the suitability. The system needs to be reformed to create punishments that suit the committed crime (Mallicoat 61). This means that it should be modified to create uniformity and punishment certainty in general. This is because most of the severe crimes are characterized by less severe and uncertain punishments which tend to encourage offenders to become involved heavily in crimes by using rationality. Due to the lack of certainty, the present system is mainly focused on the severity but not suitability. It is by creating uniformity throughout states that the general deterrence will be encouraged across the country. With varying policies, offenders tend to strategically, select their crime scene after weighing the possible punishment which generally affects the effectiveness of the system. There, is no need of designing a system that does not emphasis on fairness since crimes can best be avoided by applying fitting punishments (Kennedy 317).

An effective system is the one that fully meets its goals in which the American criminal justice system has been unable to achieve deterrence for the longest period (Fisher and Lab 279). The system has been effective in subjecting sentences in a rather varying way due to the existing based not on the committed crime but on severity which is not a very certain mode of punishment since it fails to encourage change and negativity in regard to crimes. The current system is believed to be effective in lowering crimes due to its ability to convict most offenders but does not account for the resulting outcomes such as disparity and incarceration. It is not all about sentencing offenders but effectiveness should be gauged on the capability to rehabilitate and encourage change. Given that the system encourages severe crimes among repeated offenders this is not pleasing and thus reform is needed (Cole 6).

In summing up, the present views that the present criminal justice system is effective in discouraging crimes is wrong. The system needs to be reformed in order to create uniformity and fight crime in accordance. This is because the system lacks uniformity and mainly focuses on the severity of punishment rather than the fitness of such sentences in order to encourage change. More severe crimes are being penalized rather leniently while some acquire zero punishment regardless of the resulting outcome.  It is due to this disparity that the American incarcerated populace is ranked the highest across the globe. Based on the uncertain laws criminals are highly willing to engage in high severity crimes in order to receive minimally or zero punishment.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Work Cited

Mallicoat, Stacy L, and Christine Gardiner. Criminal Justice Policy. , 2013. Internet resource.

Kennedy, David M. Deterrence and Crime Prevention: Reconsidering the Prospect of Sanction. Routledge, 2012. Print.

Cole, George F. Criminal Justice in America. Place of publication not identified: Wadsworth, 2017. Print.

Fisher, Bonnie, and Steven P. Lab. Encyclopedia of Victimology and Crime Prevention. Thousand Oaks, Calif: SAGE Publications, 2010. Print.