Just Dessert

Just sweet Name ADJ/215 employment Instructor Just Dessert It is a normal feeling for populate in our society to want someone to be punished for the annoyance they commit. Without any type of punishment it feels like middlingice was not served particularly when there is a victim involved. This in many peoples eyes is a way to preciselyify punishment and it is based on the and afters possibility. With this speculation it is the belief that a person should be punished based on the harm they caused and the crime they committed.In another(prenominal) words the punishment should fit the crime. People who are for secure confection believe that retribution just nowifies punishment because it is deserving based on the crime. Where the argue side believes that justification of punishment lies in the ability to prevent or minimize next harm. Arguments in Favor of Just Dessert When researching just dessert I found three particular arguments in choose of the just dessert theory. The first argument is that the punishment should be the same(p) for all offenders based on the crime they committed.This is considered to be fair and confirm punishment because it is deserving of the crime committed. The second argument supports that just dessert encompasses fair treatment both to the vulnerable in society and victims quite a than just the offenders. This allows the victims of crimes to know what type of justice they idler expect. And finally the tercet argument believes that the just desert theory is the best way to explicate the death penalty for murder because if an offender takes a life they would recognise and expect that their punishment would be a sentence of death.Arguments Against Just Dessert on that point are many arguments against the just desserts theory. Two significant arguments against the just dessert theory are that it gives an inadequate justification of bias or hate crimes and cannot explain the states democratic duty to value the most v ulnerable victims. Many opponents are concerned that the state legislatures give set unreasonably high sentences. Just dessert is also vista to be inflexible and fixed for every offender very bantam if any consideration is given to the wad surrounding his or her crime.There is also a fear that just dessert would remove the replenishment aspect from prisons across the country. Those that choose to argue in favor of just dessert to support the continued use of the death penalty in the United States are missing, or choose to ignore, many fallacies with the argument of just dessert in support of the death penalty. An important point to view as in mind is that the United State is the only democracy in the world that still uses the death penalty as a practical punishment. (Foley, 2006). My Position is Against Just DessertMy position was assigned to be against just dessert. While researching just dessert and exploring both sides of the argument I can understand why people are agains t just dessert. It would seem that this theory would not be beneficial when it take places to certain types of crimes. When dealing with a trip of a single individual who has committed a crime, participants appeared insensitive to the factors that should compel sentencing when utilitarian goals are the motivating force it was the factors relevant to the just desolate perspective that determined sentencing. (Carlsmith, Darley, & Robinson, 2002). The sentence at an individual level seems to come from a strictly deservingness-based stance rather than taking into consideration the circumstances surrounding the crime when it comes to deciding punishment. Although the type of crime may be similar, no crime is the same or committed for the same reason. The theory of just dessert is retrospective rather than prospective. The punisher need not be concerned with future outcomes, only with providing punishment appropriate to the given harm.Although it is certainly preferable that the puni shment serve a secondary function of inhibiting future harminsideng, its justification lies in righting a wrong, not in achieving some future benefit. (Carlsmith, Darley, & Robinson, 2002). The belief is that the punishment should be proportionate to the harm the person caused. The enigma becomes that our judicial system is not perfect and there are propagation when unbiased people are convicted of a crime. If we utilize the just dessert theory with someone ho was convicted of murder we would sentence them to death. If the person was after found to be not guilty we would have murdered an innocent person based on this theory. References Carlsmith, K. M. , Darley, J. M. , & Robinson, P. H. (2002). Why Do We Punish? bullying and just deserts as motives for punishment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(2), 284-299. doi10. 1037/0022-3514. 83. 2. 284 Foley, M. (2006). Toward Understanding the Death Penalty Debate. Retrieved from http//www. ala. org/ala/acrl/acrlpmbs/c hoice/content/essay. cfm