For instance, retribution is focused on retaliation; and is not particularly concerned with mitigating future crime. In contrast, deterrence is focused on preventing future crime, but its effectiveness as a general deterrence remains unproven. Likewise, rehabilitation is aimed at preventing future crime, but historically, it has failed to mitigate crime rates. On the other hand, incapacitation seeks to deprive the offender of his ability to commit future crimes, but, suggests, that offenders are incorrigible. The aforementioned sentencing goals are related to distinct sentencing models. These include determinate sentencing, where “state statues determine the length of incarceration” (Zhang, et al, 2014, 694); and indeterminate sentencing, which sets a range of time of confinement, which is dependent of the offenders conduct while incarcerated. Sentencing models are usually accompanied concurrent and or consecutive sentences. Under concurrent sentences, and offender serves a prescribed amount of time of confinement for multiple crimes committed together. In contrast, consecutive sentences require offenders to serve jail sentences for each crime separately, one after the …show more content…
Once meted, its effect is final and not reversible. It should be preserved as a sanction against offenders who commit heinous crimes, were there is a loss of life. This perspective is supported by the Bible, in Genesis 9:6, which states, “Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed.” The bible also states in Exodus 21:16, “And he that stealeth a man, he shall surely be put to death.” However, certain verses in the bible can also be interpreted as support for the abolishment of capital punishment. These include Romans 13:9 which states “…Thou shalt not kill…” and John 8:3-11, in which, Jesus, rejects Moses law of adultery, for which the punishment is stoning to death. This is consistent with the view that capital punishment is murder, cruel, and