RETRIBUTIVIST SYSTEM

Retributivist Sentencing System



Retributivist Sentencing System

Introduction

Retributive justice or retribution is a theory of justice , and more specifically a theory of punishment - which maintains that proportionate punishment is a morally acceptable response to the lack or crime, whether or not this punishment produce tangible benefits. In ethics and law, the "principle of proportionality of punishment" states that the severity of the penalty must be reasonable and proportionate to the seriousness of the offense. The concept is present in most cultures around the world. The principle of proportionality of punishment does not necessarily require that the punishment is equivalent to failure, as in the previous law of retaliation.

The philosophers of criminal law have contrasted the Retributivism with utilitarianism. For utilitarian's, punishment has a purpose teleological, justified by its ability to meet future benefits, such as reducing crime rates, or preventions. For retributivists, however, punishment is retrospective in nature, consistent with past criminal behavior is punished, and strictly intended to punish according to the severity of the conduct. The severity of criminal behavior can be calculated, according to retributivists, the level of damage, the amount of unfair advantage gained or the "moral imbalance" caused .

Discussion

Designated as a complete theory, it follows the maxim that it is fair to return evil for evil, and sees punishment as an end in itself, it is the "retribution" that replaces private vengeance taking the form of public punishment in the XIII century. The absolute theory is based on the idea of retributive justice, and is based on an evolution of the rule of retaliation, replacing the blood feud. Major exhibitors have been Kant absolute theory, providing an ethical foundation, while Hegel comes to a legal basis. The Kantian position states that the punishment is justified by the moral value of the criminal law contravened and the need to preserve the state of ethics, ethics being a pattern of social interaction. Thus it is argued that retribution is to inflict pain equivalent to unjustly produced, to thereby ensure ethical action against an objectively contradictory.

"For the retributivists, when smoke at school X, X commits an offense as such is inappropriate, as a result, and if he or she freely and voluntarily, he is guilty and a bearer of a moral agent must expiate guilt, for which it must receive from the authority which in turn is due to them, i.e. punishment. The offense will be rewarded with punishment (which is bad) in order to delete or flush-if possible-the offense. In short, the subject is punished 'because he committed an offense. “Kant and Hegel represent in modern times, paradigmatic and genuinely, this doctrine. According to Kant, an absolute moral imperative is to punish the guilty obligation by the mere fact of having committed the offense or crime. "Even when civil society, he writes, was dissolved with the consent of all its members, the last murderer who should be in jail before trial so that the blood does not fall on people who have not claimed that ...