Justice ? idk what unit this is

Question 1

What are the pillars of sentencing

Answer 1

1. Retribution: making the offender suffer the offence- eye for an eye (death penalty).
2. Deterrence: Discouraging offenders from commiting the offence in the first place (public punishments)
3. Incapacitation: Taking offender out of society to prevent more harm being inflicted (prison)
4. Rehabilitation: Reforming the offender. Treating the issue that leads to the crime (rehab for drug addicts).
5. Restoration: Making the offender right their wrong (social service)

Question 2

What is a pro and a criticism of the pillars of sentencing

Answer 2

1. Retribution:
   + Provides a sense of proportional justice, aligns with ‘fairness’
   - Barbaric, if you will. Cycle of violence.
2. Deterrence:
   + Aims to prevent future crimes; discouraging.
   - Honestly just proven not to work. Countries with severe punishments like the death sentence don’t get less crimes. May lead to punishments that exceed the crime.
3. Incapacitation:
   + Reduces immediate risk of harm to others by removing them from society.
   - Focuses solely on containment, leading to overcrowded prisons and potentially worse behaviour when released. Fails to understand root of problem.
4. Rehabilitation:
   + Reforms offenders by addressing root of behaviour, reducing likelihood of reoffence.
   - Paternalistic: assumes wrongedoers need help and don’t know any better. Costly, time-consuming, dependent on the offender’s willingness to change.
5. Restoration:
   + Focuses on repairing harm, fostering healing and reconciliation. Encourages accountability.
   - Too lenient.

Question 3

What is need-based justice? What is an example you could give?

Answer 3

The idea everyone should get based on what they need- those who need more get more.
John Rawls: Justice as fairness- inequalities should favour the least well-off because it levels the playing field

Question 4

What is merit-based justice? What is an example you could give?

Answer 4

The idea that justice means giving unequally, based on what each person deserves considering what they have done/not done.
Robert Nozik: everyone is entitled to have what they have and want more stuff, provided you didn’t obtain it in an unfair way such as stealing (basketball player that is really popular is entitled to ask for ridiculous raise in salary, even if people are starving)