Preview

What Is Pre-Emptive Justice?

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
1134 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
What Is Pre-Emptive Justice?
Pre-emptive justice is the idea that you can, through testing predict when an individual is going to commit a crime in the future, and also what the nature of the crime will be. This seems on the surface a perfectly good idea, as surely it will cause the crime rates to be lowered and it fills some criteria’s of what the aim of punishment is. Such as the aim of punishment to Protect Society from the crime and the from the Criminal himself as he will not have to go through perhaps the trauma of reflecting on murdering someone, or have to worry about what will happen to him when he is released from prison, more importantly it would also mean that perhaps that a human being does not get murdered or a small child gets run over by someone drink driving. …show more content…
Pre-emptive Justice would also agree the aim of punishment being Reformation, this is due to the fact that after finding out what the Human being is capable of committing in terms of crime, they would be arrested and sent to prison or rehabilitation centres for a period of time and put on programs to help ensure that they no longer are capable of committing the crime which they were before, or for any crime. This would also mean that instead of serving a Prison sentence for instance for murder, which could be up to thirty years they may only be in prison for a year as they have not actually committed the crime. Meaning that this would help to solve the crisis which faces every prison, that they have to little staff and overcrowded prisons, this is due to the fact that, with Pre-emptive justice there will be less long term criminals meaning that it would really put an end to overcrowding in …show more content…
Can you actually predict a crime before it’s happened? The answer to one of these questions is very clear, so far we have not developed the technology to be able to enforce pre-emptive justice and have it as our main of punishment, although even if we could, would we want to live in a society where people may lose their right to free will and to change their minds? As stated before the major flaw with pre-emptive justice is that a person may change their mind at any time and so it would be hard to predict a crime reliably and therefore this could result in a miscarriage of justice. Yet regarding the other question, I do not think that pre-emptive justice would really work in today’s society as many people would fear that their minds could be read by the Government and therefore society could become scared of the Government. Along with this many people in modern society may be afraid of change and may not be willing to put faith in this new system and so they may rebel against it, more importantly than this some people in their minds may have thought about murder, shoplifting or drink driving, realised that it is morally wrong and then discarded the thought however people may become scared that they cannot think of anything violent in their minds as it is possible it could get picked up by the

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Satisfactory Essays

    * New concepts of justice- Changing views of punishments and the concepts and truths of being sentenced for a crime.…

    • 258 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    The five goals of criminal sentencing as listed in the 6th edition of Criminal Justice Today are retribution, incapacitation, deterrence, rehabilitation and restoration. Retribution is defined within the text as, “the act of taking revenge upon a criminal perpetrator.” (Schmalleger, p.366) Retribution is often linked to early societies when punishment such as death and exile were carried out very swiftly without a…

    • 5792 Words
    • 24 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Is it inhumane to arrest and convict a person of terrible crimes, even if it is not yet committed, if it is certain that it will be? Utopia is an imaginary place in which everything is perfect; in comparison, dystopia is an imaginary state in which the condition of life is extremely bad as from deprivation, oppression, or terror. George Orwell’s 1984 (1949), is a novel based on life in a dystopian setting, with a totalitarian government centered on war and hatred. Steven Spielberg’s Minority Report (2002) is a film in a futuristic setting with a system which predicts future murders so that citizens live a homicide-free utopian life. Winston Smith is the main character in 1984. His rebelious views on his society and government cause his arrest for ‘thoughtcrime,’ for which he is brainwashed until he complies to his society’s views. In Minority Report, John Anderton (Tom Cruise) begins by completely trusting the system which allegedly predicts murders before they happen. In fact, Anderton is an officer of precrime himself, and is responsible for figuring out the specific details of the murders. However, when it is revealed in the film that Anderton will murder a man he has not even met, he tries to fight the system to prove his innocence. The idea that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely is the central message of both 1984 and Minority Report. This is because technology is used to enforce power, it is purported to be infallible, and the result of the misuse of power is corruption.…

    • 1352 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Looking out for the state of the public's satisfaction in the scheme of capital sentencing does not constitute serving justice. Today's system of capital punishment is thick with inequalities and injustices. The commonly offered arguments for the death penalty are filled with holes." It was a deterrent. It removed killers. It was the ultimate punishment. It is biblical. It satisfied the public's need for retribution. It relieved the anguish of the victim's family." All of these reasons prove to either be wrong or not fully supported. Morally, it is a continuation of the cycle of violence and degrades all who are involved in its enforcement, as well as its victim.…

    • 846 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Cja/234 Sentencing Paper

    • 1495 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Earlier responses to crime were to be brutal, which included torture, humiliation, mutilation, and branding. These kinds of punishments often attempted to relate the punishment to the crime, as close as possible. The first response to crime incorporated linking criminal acts to sin and developing strict punishments. Throughout the years, this thought process has changed into a more humane system. The reason for corrections to is to protect the society but also to provide rehabilitation to these individuals. Punishments for criminals now include main objectives that widely differ from the first believed aspects of punishments. Punishments now embrace objectives pertaining to deterrence, incarceration, rehabilitation, retribution and restitution.…

    • 1495 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    8th Amendment

    • 1163 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Therefore it achieves its purpose by controlling and regulating societies’ behavior through effective and rationale punishment. If the government sets out a policy like the death penalty its use must be justified not only legally, but also socially, politically, and in execution. Instances, where these doctrines are misused and misinterpreted by the officials in charge of implementing them, brings into question its overall legitimacy. Justice Marshall states there are “ six purposes conceivably served by capital punishment: retribution, deterrence, prevention of repetitive criminal acts, encouragement of guilty pleas and confessions, eugenics, and economy,” ( 63). These purposes provide an idea to justify the use of capital punishment. Yet, if the use of the penalty does not help with the with controlling crime, specifically with the uses of the ideas provided by Justice Marshall, then its overall use should be questioned. The blatant racial bias found towards African-Americans in death penalty sentencing puts into question the legitimacy of the legal system and more specifically the effectiveness of the death penalty. Thus, if the policy discriminately targets specific races, minorities, and ethnicities it is evident this policy must be examined and questioned. Moreover, as Justice Marshall states “…

    • 1163 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Sentencing Paper

    • 477 Words
    • 2 Pages

    The final and stricter objective is incapacitation. This objective is usually reserved for the more heinous crimes and offenders that maybe incapable of reform. These types of crime would involve multiple murders or large amount of public terror.…

    • 477 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Moving forward, we examine the rehabilitation view. This view of punishment fails the guilt requirement because the criminal justice system would have to sort out all the potential criminals from society and attempt to rehabilitate them and attempt to make them into a better person, which would be nearly impossible. It also fails the equal treatment requirement because each criminal would require a different form of…

    • 581 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    “In the early 1970, the top argument in favor of the death penalty was general deterrence” (Radelet & Borg, 2000, page 2). The authors argue that the death penalty does not prevent others from committing the same offense. They describe how deterrence studies have failed to support the hypothesis that the death penalty is more effective at preventing criminal homicides than along imprisonment.…

    • 883 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    This is not to say that the justice system is justified in putting our criminals through excruciating torture and interrogations in order to ensure that they never commit a crime out of fear. However, this means that retribution makes more sense than rehabilitation…

    • 1387 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Crime and Justice Process

    • 1297 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Victims can pursue one or even a combination of three distinct goals. The first is too see to it that hard-core offenders who act as predators are punished, The second is to use the justice process as leverage to compel lawbreakers to undergo rehabilitative treatment. The third possible aim is to get the court to order convicts to make restitution for any expenses arising from injuries and losses. Punishment is what comes to most people’s minds first, when considering what justice entails. Throughout history, people have always punished one another. However, they may disagree about their reasons for subjecting a wrongdoer to pain and suffering. Punishment is usually justified on utilitarian grounds as a necessary evil. It is argued that punishing transgressors curbs future criminality in a number of ways. The offender who experiences unpleasant consequences learns a lesson and is discouraged from breaking the law again, assuming that the logic of specific deterrence is sound. Making an example of a convicted criminal also serves as a warning to would be offenders contemplating the same act, provided that the doctrine of general deterrence really works.…

    • 1297 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Radelet, M. L., Akers, R. L. (1996) Deterrence and the Death Penalty: The Views of the Experts,…

    • 997 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Before I proceed, I think it best to delve further into to the basics of criminal Deterrence, and what it is. Deterrence is based on the concept that if the consequence of committing a crime outweighs the benefits of the crime, then the perpetrator will be deterred from committing said crime. This is all in the idea that as humans we all know the difference between right and wrong and that with criminal behavior, a penalty is bound to follow, when an individual acts, they’re doing so out of free will and they know what they’re doing, be it right or wrong. Ironically the deterrence model is flawed to an extent with it’s thinking; criminals are rational, a murderer may be a murderer for the same reasons I choose to work as a salesman for the time being: because the profession makes him better off than anything else available to them. The model fails to realise that murderers, or anyone who commits crime for that matter, are constantly outweighing the benefits and repercussions of any actions they may commit, not thinking of what may be a rational and sound decision to others.…

    • 1104 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Sociology Death Penalty

    • 1406 Words
    • 6 Pages

    The death penalty sentence in America does not serve as a meaningful deterrence. [P]roponents of deterrence have argued that in order for legal sanctions to be effective deterrence to crime, they must be (1) severe, (2) administered with certainty, (3) administered swiftly (celerity), and (4) administered publicly.…

    • 1406 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    The Death Penalty

    • 872 Words
    • 4 Pages

    As a deterrent to crime, the death penalty has little effect because the chances of a murder being sentenced to death are slim to none. However the death penalty deters some people. As the Royal Commission (1948–1953) observed in its lengthy and thoughtful report, “We can number its failures, but we cannot number its successes.”23 We can never know how many people who would have otherwise committed murder stopped them only because society threatened death as punishment. The deterrence question, really, is not whether the death penalty deters—sometimes it surely does—but whether, on balance, it deters more effectively than life without parole. (D’elia).…

    • 872 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays