do you think that harsher sentencing would reduce crime?

Question

should the punishment for a crime should act just as much as a deterrent? i mean criminals probably assess the risk of commiting a crime to decide whether it is worth the possibility of getting caught. for example, if you steal a car you would probably get about 1 year, and be out in 6 months. If there was a mandatory sentence of 10-15 years which you have to serve in full, would car crime go down? it may seem an extreme sentence but i think it would stop a lot of people doing it and if they did and got caught they certainly wouldn't do it again. You could say the punishment doesn't fit the crime well then good. it shouldn't be fair.

Answer 1

A very good and understandable Question , However the actual "Sentencing" is readily available but handing out ,shall we say - "stiffer" sentences is Interfered with by the Army of C P S and Defence Lawyer Tossers , It seems that the Climate in our country is very much in Favour of the Offender - I.e the Bloody Criminal and the Victim is treated Like an Offender and a Nuisance - Thousands and Thousands of Pounds in Fines are never , ever Paid . Our Country is without any Doubt in a great crisis with our Law and Order - in fact the Criminal Fraternity are having their own way Through and Through Aided and Abetted by the Lunatic "Politically Correct" - The the Sick and Demented "Do Gooders" and the Sinister "Enemy Within",I.e Politicians , Now "Importing" Criminals by the thousand - A situation which is gradually "Destroying" our once Great Country- --- Not by Accident-- This Is a Great and ever increasing Disaster --- Good Luck to You

Answer 2

1

Answer 3

Somewhat it would, but would the consequences be worth it?
The most serious Violent crimes however, Murder, Rape, Assault, and Discharge of Weapons and Property Crimes are usually caused by people in a state of Active Addiction or Emotional Turmoil, Rage and Anger. The underlying causes would suggest that if nothing is done to curb Addiction and Mental and emotional fitness and maturity these crime rates will not be affected much by harsher sentences. Some of these already have the death sentence attached to them. The mental capacity of the criminal at the time of the commision of the crime is such that they are unable to make a rational decision due to their mental state. They Know they will get away with it, and they believe this. Even if they know right and wrong, emotional immaturity, and the resulting decision making process will continue to cause these types of crimes to be committed. It would however possibly deter a repeat offender who has matured, or been scared, and if he has learned to stay off drugs and alcohol.
A younger offender who is taught and given a chance to learn and change with a lighter sentence may be an exception, may save his life, and the community a wopping bill for future incarcerations. All of those people who would make it out and rejion society as regular citizens would be hardened criminlas after serving 15 years for a childhood joyride, if they survived.
Judges have so many factors to deal with. I agree the incarceration and rehabilitation should fit the crime. There is never a blanket answer that can change everything and make it better.
Putting that many people away for that long would be expensive
Your taxes would probably triple to pay for it, and the result would be marginal.

Answer 4

Punishment is not a deterrant. People will always commit crime there is no deterrant. I don't believe that you can reform a criminal. The punishment should fit the crime. A jury of 12 honest men (or women, or an equal mix of both)( I'm trying to be P.C. )should decide the sentence, not a judge. I don't think the death penalty should be imposed on anybody, regardless of what they are accused of, because there is always the possibility of convicting an innocent. I know that innocents have been executed in the past, and Im sure that many more innocents will continue to be executed in the future.
I'll get down off my high horse now and let you discuss it amongst yourselves.

Answer 5

I think that tonybobette makes a good point with National Service. this has been brought up in Australia several times, with no success, yet would provide for the discipline required to break the habit of crime. And again, Tara Fabulous nails it with alot of people jsut don't believe they will get caught..... Yeha the thought of getting nabbed is with you all the way through, yet its not the most immediate thought in your mind..... you are at that point more concerned with (in your hypothetical situation) getting into that car an gettin outta there. The end result a crimainal sees is getting away with it....... not getting caught.....increasing sentencing times for minor crimes would just add to the worlds overpopulated jails anyway. the question is not to increase the penalties, but to have a look at some of the things that are illegal. Many crimes which are crowding out our jails have been removed from penal codes in countries all through the world, and yet the "civilised western world" refuses to adapt. Something must change somewhere, or society will all end up being criminals.

Answer 6

didn't read the text, just the question'
if harsher sentencing reduced crime, then the US would have virtually none. the US has the highest incarceration rate in the free world, and is higher than some countries where freedom is not espoused!
there are a lot of very serious penalties for crime in the US such as the three strikes you're out policy, but it doesn't stop people from being criminals
criminals don't think they're going to get caught, so harsh sentencing is irrelevant to them until they are in front of a judge

Answer 7

The sentencing should be stiffer, and the offenders should serve their full sentence.

Take on the American system, 3 strikes and your out!!

The police arrest them, the offender peas NOT GUILTY at court, then waits until the last possible minute and then changed their plea to guilty. They do this in an effort to get the case thrown out of court due to witnesses not turning up and get adjournments for silly reasons - all this gives the offender more time on the streets. If they were guilty in the first place they should make that plea from the start. In most cases they will get a reduced sentence due to the fact they have gone guilty, regardless if this was from the start of 6 months down the line of the trial, but I think that they should be given the full term of sentence in this scenario. They know they are guilty, but have waisted the courts time the police's time and witnesses time.

Answer 8

No, I don't think harsher punishment will deter crime. I think we need to go all the way back to childhood and ensure a proper upbringing.

The cause of most crime begins with poor parenting. I cringe when I hear parents threaten their child (or children) while in a public place. "You stop that right now or I'm going to smack you." And do they smack the child? No. After days and days of hearing those not-carried-out threats, the child ignores any disciplinary efforts.

No, I don't always agree with smacking a child. First, make sure the child is not hungry or sleepy when you take them out. And listen when the child tries to talk to you.

If you must discipline the child, then do it immediately. Threats for later punishment are worthless.

If a child learns from the beginning how to behave and how to accept the fact that the world does not revolve around him/her and that he/she is not going to receive everything they want, we'd all be better off and we'd have less criminals.

Going back to the beginning...birth control. If you must have sex, then consider protection so you don't bring an unwanted, unloved child into the world.

Answer 9

It's not the harsher sentencing that's the problem,but the fact they have it easy whilst in prison.It's a hotel for them,paid by the British tax-payer.
If they took away all the niceties,and brought back the old system of prison punishment,then maybe things would be different.
But in this day and age,everybody is shouting about there so called ` human rights`.
If they were to think of the consequences of their actions, before they commit a crime,then maybe our prison system wouldn't be overflowing

Answer 10

Yes I do. That said,what is the point of sentencing those criminals to imprisonment,when prison itself is more like a hotel!!! They have most comforts of home!! It cannot be that bad,thousands seem to want to go there!!! Perhaps harsher prisons along with harsher sentences is the way to go.Oh,sorry,they can't do that,it would violate their human rights!!! Its a joke. Its time to start PUNISHING criminals,then, and only then, will the crime rate drop!!!!