Legal Issues

There are many contradicting debates on the best way of combating criminology in our human society. It is the wish of every individual wish to see justice done for both the offender and the offended. Based on this reasoning, many proponents of punishment have claimed rightly that executing punishment on criminals is the only solution mainly because it gives equitable justice to the criminal offenders for the wrongs they have committed against others in the community (Tan, 2008). Nevertheless, the realization of sustainable security and economic development on the human community calls for ensuring that all members of the society live in harmony. It is mainly because of this reason that proponents of the use of rehabilitation see it as the best tool for realizing sustainable security and harmonious coexistence of the different members of the society. Such an approach seeks to make criminals more reliable both in character and respect for human rights of others (U.S. Courts, 2010).

This paper is written as an evaluation of the effectiveness of both punishment and rehabilitation in combating criminal acts in the society. The paper in particular addresses issues like the effectiveness of punishment on deterrence of crime, impact on the victim and their families, impact on the offender, and impact of such in the management of convicted offenders in prisons and under community supervision as compared to rehabilitation. The author also gives a personal opinion on the best way to realizing equitable justice and sustainable security in the community.

First is a discussion on deterrence on crime. Punishment is one of the most commonly used methods of combating criminology in our criminal justice systems (Specter, 1996). This is mainly because such are seen as giving a sense of equitable justice to the offended by punishing the offender. It is important to note here that most crimes in the society are acts of ignorance or self-driven deviance of the underlying laws (Tan, 2008)). It is because of this reason that it beats the sense of logical reasoning that upholding punishment on such criminals can be undermined. Still to note is the fact that the sole purpose of punishment in our prison systems is both to hold the offender accountable for the wrong he or she committed on the victims as well as the community in general (Larrabee, 2006). The prisons and community supervision also seeks acts to prevent the potential occurrence of such criminal acts in the society thus realizing sustainable security for other members of the community (California Courts, 2010).

Second is a discussion on the impact on victims and victims families. Rehabilitation is on purpose meant to provide convicted criminals with a safe, secure, and highly reliable correction, which seeks to ensure harmonious integration of such criminals into the large society (Tan, 2008). Punishment on the other side seeks to confine, manage, and ensure that the offenders are made to suffer for their wrongs in prison as a way of reducing any possible re-offending by such criminals upon their release (U.S. Courts, 2010). By analyzing the impact of both punishment and rehabilitation on the offender, it is clear from the cited intends of both justice practices that rehabilitation is the best as it minimizes incidences of inhuman treatment thus increasing chances of realizing psychological modeling of reliable character on the offender (Tan, 2008).

Though by punishment some offenders may change, such harsh treatments have been evidently found to increase the levels of tolerance by criminals and thus increase recidivism rates. This have the end effect increasing the gravity and frequency of crimes in the society. It is however evidently clear that many rehabilitated criminals are subject to re-involvement in criminal acts. This means that such rehabilitation act have and can still be a way of pretence by criminals to regain a chance back into community (Oregon  Blue Book, 2009). Such concerns make punishment the better option because it ensures the long term confining and correction of individuals.

The effectiveness of punishment or rehabilitation in managing offenders also can be debated in terms of their impacts in the society. The wish of every individual in the community is to witness the equitable execution of justice by holding the offender accountable to the victim. Such concerns are however subject to debate as rehabilitation can serve to ensure the sustainable security of the victim upon the release of the offender (Specter, 1996). It is however to be important to state that punishment is seen as more sufficient in ensuring equitable accountability of offender to their criminal acts (Phoenix Municipal Court, 2009). It does not only give the victim a sense of legal justice in revenge but also instill some sense of respecting other peoples rights in the offender. Punishment also acts as a lesson to other members of the society. To note hare is that it is the concern by other members in the society on the harsh treatment that has been imposed on an individual because of acts of crime can deter others from getting involved in such acts (California Courts, 2010).

Upholding rehabilitation, on the other hand, can be seen as a loop hole for committing of crimes as such could only amount to counseling and medical treatment rather than harsh treatment by prison police. Most of the rehabilitation programs are usually costly to the government and the community at large (Specter, 1996).
Last is a personal opinion. From the debate, it is clear that the method of managing criminal offenders should be based on the gravity and nature of crime committed. Drug addicts and the mentally impaired, for example, are never corrected sufficiently without the involvement of psychological rehabilitation. This is mainly because such categories of criminals are mainly seen as psychologically compromised to act from their conscious reasoning and thus upholding punishment will not yield much in restoring consciousness in their acts (Tan, 2008).

Serious felony offenders on the other side have evidently been established as a great threat to the sustainable security in the society even after rehabilitation. It is based on this reasoning that punishment is the best tool for correction of serious felony offenders as it does not only instill some sense of guiltiness on the offender but also provides for long term confinement of the offender in prison thus reducing their chances of re-offending (Larrabee, 2006). Therefore, it is evidently clear that the ultimate success of any criminal justice system can only be realized by involving a combination of both rehabilitation and punishment approach in the correction facilities.