|
Mortimer J. Adler:
On Punishment
The word "punishment" is used in the criminal
law to stand for whatever treatment the state
recommends for convicted offenders. That treatment
may be either utilitarian or retributive, but it
cannot be both.
The treatment is retributive when the punishment
fits the crime, not the criminal. Retributive
punishment may or may not have a salutary effect
upon the criminal, but the severity of the
punishment must be measured by the seriousness of
the crime. What was once called the lex
talionis required a just proportion between the
injury done to the victim of the crime and the
injury tone suffered by the criminal -- an eye for
and eye, a life for a life.
Punishment is utilitarian or pragmatic when its
aim is not to do strict justice, but rather to
deter or reform criminals. Here the treatment
accorded offenders judged guilty of committing the
same offense may not be the same. The treatment may
vary with the age and the character of the
offender.
It is in this context that the question of
capital punishment must be considered by those who
think the aim of punishment should be to prevent
crime, and particularly recidivism, which is the
recurrent criminality of offenders who are
paroled.
Some states have now abolished capital
punishment on the grounds that it is unjust, a
violation of the right to life. While the offender
is alive, errors that may have occurred in his or
her trial can be rectified. The right to life is
not violated by the incarceration of the offender
for life with no parole allowed. Nor is the right
to liberty violated, for the offender incarcerated
for life even though his exercise of liberty is
severely curtailed.
The offender's right to liberty would be
violated only if the warden treated the
incarcerated offender as his personal slave. That
would be unjust because it would be a violation of
the offender's right to be treated as a free human
being rather than as a slave.
Current recommendations that criminals found
guilty of three offenses should be incarcerated for
life with no parole allowed is not a violation of
human rights. They do not deprive the repeat
offender's life or liberty, but they may be
pragmatically sound measures aimed at reducing
recidivism and thus preventing crime.
Enrich
Your Life With a Philosophy Book...
Enrich
Your Life With a Philosophy
Magazine...
Academy
Showcase
Specials
|
|
|
|
|
|