My Philosophy about Corrections
... a person has an internal behavior problem, the result of their actions is not their fault, but the fault of their genetic backgrounds. The society one grows up in is an external force that may or may not add to their illegal outcomes. If an individual grows up in a difficult place, the result may be a life of crime, but this is not necessarily their fault. Consider how difficult it is to prove the external or internal factors; many persons have been released on such terms. As a result, citizens have had trouble drawing their own opinions. Some believe that the external and internal factors are just a defense to avoid sentencing that they may well earn. Others conclude that such factors are very important in determining a criminal’s sentencing and they may even believe that release is required and a second chance should be given to the offender. Communities have taken different approaches to corrections on the basis of their own conclusions. In order to see the greatest forms of retribution, one should look to the European countries. The most famous executions of corrections took place in the Tower of London. Many individuals, innocent or guilty, were put to death mainly by being beheaded. Forms of capital punishment have ranged from being boiled alive in the Middle Ages to being drawn and divided for high treason in the late 19th century. Perhaps the most recent form of capital punishment is lethal injection. Many countries, especially the United States, use lethal injection as their main form of the death penalty. While it is hard to say if lethal injection is moral or not, it is an accepted death sentence and is probably the least cruel and unusual form of punishment known today. The American criminal justice system has taken its own approach in reforming the correction process. Beginning around 1840, the political era developed in New York. This era tied the police to local policy. With broad social services, the departments were moved into different station houses. The movement was in hopes that the police would be on a more common level with the public and foot patrol started. Unfortunately, the relationship with the public let to corruption. The growth of the professional era in 1920 brought a reform of the system. The goals of the era were to remove the police from the public and end ties with local politicians. There was a great need to focus on the law and respect of the system. The departments became more central and controlled by an upper management. In hopes of deterring crime, a deterrent patrol was assigned. Major annoyance from the people followed this era. The peace and love symbols of the 1960s go along with the riots of the time. People were out of control and the clear result was to move to the new era of the 70s: the community-policing era. Moving the police once again put them back in touch with the public. A new class of life was brought forward and, with it, citizen satisfaction. Although there was no huge drop off in crime, citizens felt safer because of the sense of police in the community. The progress of these eras showed a carry-over in the process of criminal justice. Wilson and Kelling, two known theorists of criminology, brought out a theory explaining the repetition of the criminal in society. Calling it the Broken Window Cycle, they recognize crime was following a pattern. They realized that a fear of crime would lead a person into loneliness and, in turn, to a leaving from the community. Many folks moving from their community would, no doubt, lead to a breakdown of social controls. After a breakdown of society, serious crimes would occur followed by complete disorder. Through disorder, more persons would fear crime and the cycle would start again. In response to their Broken Window theory, Jock Young writes, “they give rise to one another and profoundly affect each other” (Walton and Young 23). In hopes of rehabilitating the offender and deterring the rest of society, many centuries have been committed to forms of punishment. When dealing with the theory of criminology, there is often no other option than punishment. One reason for punishment is deterrence. “It was probably more than anything else responsible for torture and mutilation without death” (Parsons 272). The hope with deterrence is that, in using the criminal as an example, you will make others take in that what happened was wrong and they shouldn’t do the same. If we can use one individual or a group of individuals as an example, we will save society a amazing amount of grief. While deterrence is not the only reason for punishment, it is the most popular. Incapacitation immobilizes the accused and takes away many of their chance. By doing so, the individual is keep apart and has the skill to commit crimes removed. Under strict supervision, the offender is held in prison and society is confident their safety. As for the victims or perhaps the victims’ family, many have turned to punishment for their retribution. “Getting even” is one of the major ideas a victim has. Since the offender has broken the law, they ought to have a punishment in return in hopes to pay their debt to society. Rehabilitation, however, deals more with the individual in corrections than with society. With the treatment of offenders, many believe a answer is possible. “In the last one hundred years the avowed purpose of prisons has been rehabilitation” (Killinge, Cromwell, Wood 182). Most inmates must go through a rehabilitation process. Many deal with detox, while others are turned towards educational and vocational skills. Although rehabilitation works for some, other incentives are necessary. But does rehabilitation really work? Many would say that the pains of imprisonment are far greater than what they need to be. Perhaps the greatest loss, the deprivation of liberty, not only restricts the inmate, but they are suddenly cut off from their family and friends (Killinger, Cromwell, Wood 111). It is hard to determine if these criminals will benefit from these severe deprivations. In losing such pleasures as one’s independence, a person may feel they are less of a person or are treated wrongly. The issue of removal of autonomy is a major issue in determining a criminal’s sentence. It is hard to determine if a person’s loss is neces...