The whole sentencing process in the U.S. legal system kind of makes things really complicated. I honestly feel like the court rooms decisions are based on morals and beliefs instead of written laws. Although just like the 3 branches of government this nation of ours have; the court system has a similar rock, paper, scissors counter offenses towards one an other so that someone or something doesn't get to over powered just as the jury decides whether the defendant is guilty or not and the judge just hands out the sentencing. And in my opinion when it comes to sentencing I'd like to say that there is a blanket punishment for example if you kill someone sorry bud you're going to die but when that actually comes into play in the court system your basically creating another correctional boom or making a mass genocide of criminals your choice of words. And to me this is the biggest problem with sentencing. The whole balancing act of being lean and mean on crime but not to lean cause we don't want to repeat what we did in the war on drugs when we locked everyone up and through away the key for nonviolent drug offenses or burglaries. So this is where Deterrence comes in with making some people examples to others by showing them that the crime isn't worth the punishment. Unfortunately I don't believe that there will ever be a certain punishment to stop certain crimes. We're not going to do an eye for an eye aka revenge on every single criminal that comes walking through those courtroom doors. We as a criminal justice system are not going to steal from a thief or molest a child molester. So why would we kill a murderer? Now I'm not saying that putting a small hole in a criminals head isn't sometimes the right thing to do but you must realize the affects of those defendants sentencing don't just affect them it affects the brother, mother, auntie, baby momma, ect. If home boy mcthugerson shoots up someone on his block for wearing the wrong color or selling the wrong stuff and we sentence him death or life in prison with no parole. Do you think that mans brother or son is going to become a remarkable Samaritan to society? It's very possible but most likely that brother or son will follow in his brothers/dads footsteps due to the fact that its already imbedded in his brain that the worst thing that can happen was already done to someone they knew. So in their mind that's something they believe will keep them alive and keep food on the table by gangbanging around town nothing will stop that thought in my opinion. So in my eyes when using general/specific deterrence doesn't always work I'm much more of a fan a combination of rehabilitation, retribution, and community service as alternative to putting a rope around someone's neck and breeding more murderous people due to the fact that they might have lost someone that had thrown them over the edge mentally. I feel as if with certain types of offenders those three sentencing processes combined will establish a more suitable human being ready to come back into the community by actually showing them the harm they caused and how they could have prevented it or how they could've fixed it. But just like everything else there will always be some bad eggs in the bunch and for those who are repeat offenders or just serious criminals I would show no sympathy for them and the sentencing they receive. That's really all I have left about this topic sorry I made you read so much. -BikeMaker003
This is a very well put together piece that helps me understand a very complicated set of “rules” (guidelines) that our court system follows for sentencing. When I first finished the video I just kind of sat there and tried to gather my thoughts and figure out which of these things I was going to pinpoint. Does this mean that this guideline system is to complicated? I would say no. Yes, there are many things to think about, and yes discretion for a judge can sometimes be dangerous, but in order to help differentiate between the different types of offenders that make their way through our criminal justice system we need all these different variables to keep them separated and make sure they get the correct amount of punishment so we do not have non-violent offenders sitting in our prisons 1: being disconnected from regular society, (this could jeopardize their ability to communicate with people when they get outside the bars) 2: overcrowding our prisons and thus having the possibility of going against the 8th amendment in the fact that it can be considered cruel and unusual punishment if prisons are over populated, and 3: becoming even more hardened criminals then what they ever would have been because we charged them with too hard of a sentence or because of the sentence we gave them they are unable to get a job and default back to a life of committing crime and most likely being put back behind the bars that we are supposed to be trying to rehabilitate them from. -NOsaints003
This video does give us a better understanding of the court system and the process of the sentencing. It is obvious that we do have an overcrowding in our jails and prisons because criminals are getting sentenced longer in there than they should be and we are throwing individuals in prison, who aren't a threat to society. Our criminal justice system is structured very well and we have fair laws, but sometimes we go over board with throwing people behind bars for drugs with unfair sentences, but they never been involved in violent crimes. The court system should focus more on the murders, rapists, and white collar crimes because they are the ones who are a threat to society and will effect our country in negative ways. -RW003
The sentencing process for the United States is complicated and biased based on the different aspects the court can sentence a criminal in jail, or prison due to a certain crime the individual commits if they are proven guilty, or not guilty. Basically the jury has the control over whether the individual is guilty, or not guilty for the crime that he, or she was involved in when it occurred. The jury bases their beliefs, morals, and opinions on the individual when they come up with their decision of whether or not they should spent a sentence in jail, or prison. This can be unfair and cruel to the suspect because the jury didn't witness what happened during the time of the crime. There are cases where the suspect was proven "guilty" for a crime that they didn't commit because not all the of the evidence is always correct. The jury makes their decision during the trail and they vote on if the suspect should be thrown in jail, or prison, then it becomes a problem when there is no justice for the individual, who didn't commit the crime, but he, or she is punished with a certain number of years sentence behind bars. It's ridiculous when a certain race receives a longer sentence than other race for committing the same crime. Judges have in the past gave an individual an unfair sentence in jail, or prison because they don't like that race due to their background and how they grew up. This specific action of the judge shows how messed up our court system is and how we, as human beings need to reconsider how we treat other people, not how our society was structured in the past with slavery and discrimination. -RW003
There are always two sides to these problems, in one way we want our judges to be able to have discrimination so that the people who are first time offenders and show that they will unlikely commit another offense don’t get punish quite as much, but at the same time we can’t give them too much wiggle room because everyone is biased in their own way and this goes for the judges in our Criminal Justice System especially. It’s an imperfect system. -NOsaints003
The sentencing system in our country, as pointed out by our professor, could absolutely use some work. This video pointed out that our system focuses on six elements when sentencing the guilty party: Prevention, Retribution, Incapacitation, Deterrence, Rehabilitation, and Reparation. However, how many of those does the general public honestly feel like we meet. Prevention; does our sentencing prevent crime? For the most part, yes. But when it's a question of "fight or flight" (i.e. fight for survival), how are we going to prevent that? For example, if an ex-convict is selling drugs to make money to live because their record prevents them form getting a job, how can we stop that from feeling like it is their only option? Retribution. We do almost too well at punishing the guilty parties in this country, but this is where our lack of Rehabilitation merges in. We can incapacitate people all day long, but if they don't learn or evolve after it, what was the point in the first place? This brings me to Reparation, or "giving back" as it is outlined in the video. If we do not properly rehabilitate those who we incarcerate, not only will they not help the community once they become free again, they may even come out doing more harm then they ever would have in the first place. Sentencing, as well as our Criminal Justice System as a whole obviously have a long way to go before they are considered perfect, but with the steps we've taken just in the past 50 or so years, we are making great progress. We must just continue to move forward and with a more progressive way of thinking if we wish to make this nation better than it ever has been. CK003
I agree with you. People who are in the Criminal Justice System today don't seem to under stand on what they do with sentencing with citizens it can affect them in some type of way. When it comes to these type of sentencing theories the court needs to see what the offenders crime would be and how would they go about it. Who knows what the future of the courts might come to when we get there in our careers. GoodVibes003
I feel like when sentencing people today just makes it complicated for people to comprehend when going to trail. In today's sentencing process it is not equal to anyone that come to the court for a fair trial. For example if I was caught with a little big of marijuana on me and I had to go to jail since I am a white male the judge would give me 30-90 days in jail, but if I was an African American the judge would give 2-3 years in jail. Some people may think I'm crazy when I say this but the Criminal Justice System in this country today is not equal to anyone. When the narrator from the video mentions the sentencing theories when I look at rehabilitation I think that only type of theory only exist in certain prisons. Rehab might work for some people and it might not turn out the right way it wants to be played out. From a personal example when my grandpa went to prison and after he did a little time in prison and did a little time in the half way house do you think that the rehabilitation helped him. Honestly no it didn't he still went back to his old ways. When I think of that it just makes me think that if they don't do this rehab program and when they get out they are just digging a bigger hole than what they are already in. Retribution is something that the courts need to be more in depth with because if someone is dangerous to society they need to look at the pros and cons of the situation. What if someone close to you got hurt or even worse killed because the court wants to think that hes "insane" well it's time to look at this a little more carefully. We live in a world where the court can't decide rather to incarcerate so many innocent people and let the people who actually commit crime on a regular basis or is the system just giving up on everyone. GoodVibes003
I absolutely agree with you, about our criminal justice system not being equal to everyone. Your completely right about only certain prisons have rehab sources. Because There are a lot of criminals who need help buy aren't allowed to receive it. I believe that the courts should go into depth as well with retribution. Because like you said "what if someone was close to us." I for one definitely don't want anyone I know getting hurt.-K9003
I believe that our current court system is rather good, comparing to many other nations around the world. The fact that the government put retribution higher on the objective, which would provide a sense of comfort for the public and the victim's family or friends. Our current court system may not be the most perfect system there can be, for example there may be discrimination or bias opinion that would be in play. However, as the narrator stated the different goals to a sentencing, I feel that the government have tried pretty hard to fight the goals of how a person should be sentenced. The government made different types of goals to benefit both sides or the fence. For example a person who is committed and punished for a certain crime, were expected to pay the society and the victim's family back however they can. Despite a person may be imprisoned, they are not left hanging in the prison, but instead the rehabilitation goal helps the individual to realize that what they have done is against the law and public norm, which tries to rehabilitate their minds, possibly given a chance to fit back into the society one day. Of course there are times where rehabilitation may not be met in certain prisons, such as private owned prisons, as we learned in class. Rehabilitation and loosing a inmate is bad for business of the private prisons. Despite the cons of our current system and it's possible unfairness, but this is the best we have got as of right now. I feel like the court system should be improved, but also we cannot go on with another way of sentencing an individual. The ration between good and bad of the system we have now, I feel that it is a 50:50 ration between good and bad. We got to make what we have now count and improvement to our system is definitely needed in the future. JZ003
The number one take away I had from after watching this video was that when a court decides the sentence for an individual they have to be fair and consistent. Without consistency societies view of the criminal justice system becomes tainted and there is a lack of trust. One way that a judge stays consistent when sentencing an individual is looking at the type of crime, the seriousness of the crime, and the circumstances. These three things enable the judge to make a correct decision on the sentence for the individual. The video also discusses the six main goals of the sentencing process. The first goal of sentencing is prevention. It is the corrections goal to prevent any further crimes being committed by the individual and aiding them in their sentence. The second goal is retribution. Retribution is simply punishment. Retribution is typically one of the more sought after goals because it pleases the public. The third is Incapacitation. This is what the United States has done with the majority of criminal cases. Simply locking someone away has proven to be a perfect short-term solution. The fourth goal of sentencing is Deterrence. Deterrence has two different levels to it. The first is individual deterrence. This is when the punishment of a crime is specific to you and causes you not to commit a crime. The second form of deterrence is general deterrence. This is when a punishment for a specific crime reaches to a majority or group of people and causes them not to commit the crime. The fifth goal of sentencing is Rehabilitation. This is the sentencing goal that our criminal justice system is beginning to gravitate to wards. Rehabilitation is meant to help the criminal with their problems and place them back into society with a solution. The sixth goal of sentencing is reparation. Reparation is simply forcing an individual to pay a specific amount in cash back to those that they wronged. The video also discusses types of sentencing. One example it gives is based on community sentencing. This is when an individual is forced to have a curfew or clean up the community. Over all the three most important factors to sentencing are the type of crime that was committed, the seriousness of the crime, and the circumstances. These three things help the judge decided how to sentence the individual. -Bulls003
I like how you pointed out what interested you more about the video. I agree the way the judge decides on a sentencing they must look at the background first. But today in some cases judges dont look at if they have a record or not today the way the CRJ system work is crooked and we need help. students like us can only make it better.
This video was very well put together. The most important thing i took away from this was that when sentencing, the courts have to stay consistent, and provide fair sentences. When the courts provide consistency to sentences, the public therefore approves of the system and is happy. If the court doesn't provide consistancy, then the public views the system as corrupt, and distrusts that the law will be enforced correctly.A way that the court system stays consistent is that the judge takes into account the following: what crime has been committed, how serious was this crime, and the situation around the crime itself. In the video, the court has several goals of sentencing. The first one is prevention. The second is retribution. Retribution just means to punish. You wronged someone, so you will be punished for your actions. The third goal is incapacitation. You simply lock them in a cell and try to forget about them. They can't commit crimes, if they are locked away. The fourth goal of sentencing is deterrence. Deterrence has multiple levels to it. the first level of deterrence is specific. This means that you saw something happen i.e. getting hit while walking across the road. You saw the incident and it deterred you from wanting to cross the street. The second part to deterrence is general. This is when a sentence reaches a large majority of people and acts like a deterrent. They will not commit the same crime, because they don't want the same sentence. The fifth goal of sentencing is rehabilitation. Rehabilitation is meant to cure the offender and make it easier for them to be reintegrated into society once they get released. the sixth goal is reparation. This means that you( the criminal) has to pay back the victim in financial means. JE003
I like how the video explains the different theories. It talks about deterrence, and how one would stop to think about the potential punishment of their action, and not commit that crime. He talks about how you cant re-offend in prison, but that people see them as unemployable when they come out. Rehabilitation is really just any effort made to reenter a criminal back into society whether it's a half way house, or through another rehab facility. First offenders are not usually imprisoned unless its a serious crime such as murder, or rape. Educational and work opportunities are offered and suggested because it keeps then from committing crime. Its used as punishment. I think that lets people off to easy. They need to learn not to commit that crime again. In my opinion there isn't really a right, or wrong way of sentencing it depends on personal preference on what you agree with.
I like how the video explains the different theories. It talks about deterrence, and how one would stop to think about the potential punishment of their action, and not commit that crime. He talks about how you cant re-offend in prison, but that people see them as unemployable when they come out. Rehabilitation is really just any effort made to reenter a criminal back into society whether it's a half way house, or through another rehab facility. First offenders are not usually imprisoned unless its a serious crime such as murder, or rape. Educational and work opportunities are offered and suggested because it keeps then from committing crime. Its used as punishment. I think that lets people off to easy. They need to learn not to commit that crime again. In my opinion there isn't really a right, or wrong way of sentencing it depends on personal preference on what you agree with. chi003
After watching this interesting video. It really gave me some insight on all of the different ways judges can sentence prisoners for. One thing that I read that intrigued me was that "prisoners can't reoffend in prison." I actually thought that certain crimes can make a prisoner reoffend. When he talked about prevention of crime. It really made me think about or society today with, prevention of crime and how we utilize it. Our prison system today tries to keep prisoners in jail with a lengthy time sentence, rather than letting them out early just so they can commit another crime. As we can see we're slacking in the rehabilitation area and in result of that prisoners get sent back to jail. In the video he talked about "first time offenders don't go to jail." But in Chicago alone 75% of the people they arrest are first time offenders. I'm guessing that's because they want to send a message, stating that they won't be lenient with people that commit any type of crime. With that being said I would kind of agree with and kind of not because. If they were to arrest everyone there would be no community relations at all and that is huge part in policing. But then again it would make people rethink about committing crimes.
After watching this interesting video. It really gave me some insight on all of the different ways judges can sentence prisoners for. One thing that I read that intrigued me was that "prisoners can't reoffend in prison." I actually thought that certain crimes can make a prisoner reoffend. When he talked about prevention of crime. It really made me think about or society today with, prevention of crime and how we utilize it. Our prison system today tries to keep prisoners in jail with a lengthy time sentence, rather than letting them out early just so they can commit another crime. As we can see we're slacking in the rehabilitation area and in result of that prisoners get sent back to jail. In the video he talked about "first time offenders don't go to jail." But in Chicago alone 75% of the people they arrest are first time offenders. I'm guessing that's because they want to send a message, stating that they won't be lenient with people that commit any type of crime. With that being said I would kind of agree with and kind of not because. If they were to arrest everyone there would be no community relations at all and that is huge part in policing. But then again it would make people rethink about committing crimes. -K9003
This video gave me a better understanding of our processing system yet, I still feel it is a bit too much and hard to comprehend. Watching the video may be how they think things are being ran but when the terms consistent and fair are being used I think otherwise. No I don't think our court system is fair and like mentioned in class before their are other things we should be focusing on. Example given in class, we all know theirs plenty of people serving hard cord time for things that are not really dangerous to our society compared to the murders and molesters. I honestly believe that's why our murder rates are going up in the state of Illinois alone. Officers can arrest a couple males for possession of marijuana but can't get an head start on the leading suspects of the last murder a month ago. There's many ways to look at this but the most important is what ways can we change this being the "future" our professor always say. -tracker003
I feel the criminal justice system is messed up!! Like tracker003 said, we need to focus more on hard core crimes than little "petty " ones.. We arrest people lock them up with no rehabilitation and let them out, usually worse than when they went in, and expect them to be law abiding citizens. Not going to happen that's why recidivism is so high.I could so get on my soap box about this subject,and how screwed our justice system is !! However, one does not make a difference but we can join together and change the future!! MITHGHTS003
This gave me a better idea on how all the court systems they have or had the eye for and eye i think we should keep for some crimes but we do need find a better way of puinshing people for petty crimes keep locking the bads or serious crimes people open up for rehabilitation centers get people more skills or couilcing help drug help so people dont keep returning and stop given people 20 years for little crimes but we need find a way to punish them because they did break the law but jail sometimes makes them worse but find a way that people arent locked up for 20 but still litte scared and dont want to break the law jails or prison need to get under control i think they shouldn't go in come out worse should go in come out better but thats not whats happening so we need to join together change the system save some money for the state and put some of that money to schools and parts of towns maybe put more prisoners to work more often or something but that my take cowboys003
When it comes to sentencing in the CRJ system the Judge have to be far and consider consistency. When giving a sentence Judges us the same traditional theories for years to come. How to determine a sentencing they may also look at previous conviction especially if its been a repeated offense. The type of sentencing are Custodial sentencing which is for most serious offense, they would be incarcerated or in prison. Community sentencing will allow offenders to do thing like community service hours or have to participate in a group meeting for drugs, alcohol or anger management. Financial sentencing is what most offenders get, meaning they have to pay for what they did the damaged they caused fines and court fees. Last but not least your Discharged case is closed and your free. When it comes to making these decisions judges have to keep in mind the "PRIDRR" (PRIDE ROGER RABBIT) Prevention, Retribution, Incapacitate, Deterrence, Rehabilitation, and Reparation.
The whole sentencing process in the U.S. legal system kind of makes things really complicated. I honestly feel like the court rooms decisions are based on morals and beliefs instead of written laws. Although just like the 3 branches of government this nation of ours have; the court system has a similar rock, paper, scissors counter offenses towards one an other so that someone or something doesn't get to over powered just as the jury decides whether the defendant is guilty or not and the judge just hands out the sentencing. And in my opinion when it comes to sentencing I'd like to say that there is a blanket punishment for example if you kill someone sorry bud you're going to die but when that actually comes into play in the court system your basically creating another correctional boom or making a mass genocide of criminals your choice of words. And to me this is the biggest problem with sentencing. The whole balancing act of being lean and mean on crime but not to lean cause we don't want to repeat what we did in the war on drugs when we locked everyone up and through away the key for nonviolent drug offenses or burglaries. So this is where Deterrence comes in with making some people examples to others by showing them that the crime isn't worth the punishment. Unfortunately I don't believe that there will ever be a certain punishment to stop certain crimes. We're not going to do an eye for an eye aka revenge on every single criminal that comes walking through those courtroom doors. We as a criminal justice system are not going to steal from a thief or molest a child molester. So why would we kill a murderer? Now I'm not saying that putting a small hole in a criminals head isn't sometimes the right thing to do but you must realize the affects of those defendants sentencing don't just affect them it affects the brother, mother, auntie, baby momma, ect. If home boy mcthugerson shoots up someone on his block for wearing the wrong color or selling the wrong stuff and we sentence him death or life in prison with no parole. Do you think that mans brother or son is going to become a remarkable Samaritan to society? It's very possible but most likely that brother or son will follow in his brothers/dads footsteps due to the fact that its already imbedded in his brain that the worst thing that can happen was already done to someone they knew. So in their mind that's something they believe will keep them alive and keep food on the table by gangbanging around town nothing will stop that thought in my opinion. So in my eyes when using general/specific deterrence doesn't always work I'm much more of a fan a combination of rehabilitation, retribution, and community service as alternative to putting a rope around someone's neck and breeding more murderous people due to the fact that they might have lost someone that had thrown them over the edge mentally. I feel as if with certain types of offenders those three sentencing processes combined will establish a more suitable human being ready to come back into the community by actually showing them the harm they caused and how they could have prevented it or how they could've fixed it. But just like everything else there will always be some bad eggs in the bunch and for those who are repeat offenders or just serious criminals I would show no sympathy for them and the sentencing they receive. That's really all I have left about this topic sorry I made you read so much.
ReplyDelete-BikeMaker003
This is a very well put together piece that helps me understand a very complicated set of “rules” (guidelines) that our court system follows for sentencing. When I first finished the video I just kind of sat there and tried to gather my thoughts and figure out which of these things I was going to pinpoint. Does this mean that this guideline system is to complicated? I would say no. Yes, there are many things to think about, and yes discretion for a judge can sometimes be dangerous, but in order to help differentiate between the different types of offenders that make their way through our criminal justice system we need all these different variables to keep them separated and make sure they get the correct amount of punishment so we do not have non-violent offenders sitting in our prisons 1: being disconnected from regular society, (this could jeopardize their ability to communicate with people when they get outside the bars) 2: overcrowding our prisons and thus having the possibility of going against the 8th amendment in the fact that it can be considered cruel and unusual punishment if prisons are over populated, and 3: becoming even more hardened criminals then what they ever would have been because we charged them with too hard of a sentence or because of the sentence we gave them they are unable to get a job and default back to a life of committing crime and most likely being put back behind the bars that we are supposed to be trying to rehabilitate them from. -NOsaints003
ReplyDeleteThis video does give us a better understanding of the court system and the process of the sentencing. It is obvious that we do have an overcrowding in our jails and prisons because criminals are getting sentenced longer in there than they should be and we are throwing individuals in prison, who aren't a threat to society. Our criminal justice system is structured very well and we have fair laws, but sometimes we go over board with throwing people behind bars for drugs with unfair sentences, but they never been involved in violent crimes. The court system should focus more on the murders, rapists, and white collar crimes because they are the ones who are a threat to society and will effect our country in negative ways. -RW003
DeleteThe sentencing process for the United States is complicated and biased based on the different aspects the court can sentence a criminal in jail, or prison due to a certain crime the individual commits if they are proven guilty, or not guilty. Basically the jury has the control over whether the individual is guilty, or not guilty for the crime that he, or she was involved in when it occurred. The jury bases their beliefs, morals, and opinions on the individual when they come up with their decision of whether or not they should spent a sentence in jail, or prison. This can be unfair and cruel to the suspect because the jury didn't witness what happened during the time of the crime. There are cases where the suspect was proven "guilty" for a crime that they didn't commit because not all the of the evidence is always correct. The jury makes their decision during the trail and they vote on if the suspect should be thrown in jail, or prison, then it becomes a problem when there is no justice for the individual, who didn't commit the crime, but he, or she is punished with a certain number of years sentence behind bars. It's ridiculous when a certain race receives a longer sentence than other race for committing the same crime. Judges have in the past gave an individual an unfair sentence in jail, or prison because they don't like that race due to their background and how they grew up. This specific action of the judge shows how messed up our court system is and how we, as human beings need to reconsider how we treat other people, not how our society was structured in the past with slavery and discrimination. -RW003
ReplyDeleteThere are always two sides to these problems, in one way we want our judges to be able to have discrimination so that the people who are first time offenders and show that they will unlikely commit another offense don’t get punish quite as much, but at the same time we can’t give them too much wiggle room because everyone is biased in their own way and this goes for the judges in our Criminal Justice System especially. It’s an imperfect system. -NOsaints003
DeleteThe sentencing system in our country, as pointed out by our professor, could absolutely use some work. This video pointed out that our system focuses on six elements when sentencing the guilty party: Prevention, Retribution, Incapacitation, Deterrence, Rehabilitation, and Reparation. However, how many of those does the general public honestly feel like we meet. Prevention; does our sentencing prevent crime? For the most part, yes. But when it's a question of "fight or flight" (i.e. fight for survival), how are we going to prevent that? For example, if an ex-convict is selling drugs to make money to live because their record prevents them form getting a job, how can we stop that from feeling like it is their only option? Retribution. We do almost too well at punishing the guilty parties in this country, but this is where our lack of Rehabilitation merges in. We can incapacitate people all day long, but if they don't learn or evolve after it, what was the point in the first place? This brings me to Reparation, or "giving back" as it is outlined in the video. If we do not properly rehabilitate those who we incarcerate, not only will they not help the community once they become free again, they may even come out doing more harm then they ever would have in the first place. Sentencing, as well as our Criminal Justice System as a whole obviously have a long way to go before they are considered perfect, but with the steps we've taken just in the past 50 or so years, we are making great progress. We must just continue to move forward and with a more progressive way of thinking if we wish to make this nation better than it ever has been. CK003
ReplyDeleteI agree with you. People who are in the Criminal Justice System today don't seem to under stand on what they do with sentencing with citizens it can affect them in some type of way. When it comes to these type of sentencing theories the court needs to see what the offenders crime would be and how would they go about it. Who knows what the future of the courts might come to when we get there in our careers. GoodVibes003
DeleteI feel like when sentencing people today just makes it complicated for people to comprehend when going to trail. In today's sentencing process it is not equal to anyone that come to the court for a fair trial. For example if I was caught with a little big of marijuana on me and I had to go to jail since I am a white male the judge would give me 30-90 days in jail, but if I was an African American the judge would give 2-3 years in jail. Some people may think I'm crazy when I say this but the Criminal Justice System in this country today is not equal to anyone. When the narrator from the video mentions the sentencing theories when I look at rehabilitation I think that only type of theory only exist in certain prisons. Rehab might work for some people and it might not turn out the right way it wants to be played out. From a personal example when my grandpa went to prison and after he did a little time in prison and did a little time in the half way house do you think that the rehabilitation helped him. Honestly no it didn't he still went back to his old ways. When I think of that it just makes me think that if they don't do this rehab program and when they get out they are just digging a bigger hole than what they are already in. Retribution is something that the courts need to be more in depth with because if someone is dangerous to society they need to look at the pros and cons of the situation. What if someone close to you got hurt or even worse killed because the court wants to think that hes "insane" well it's time to look at this a little more carefully. We live in a world where the court can't decide rather to incarcerate so many innocent people and let the people who actually commit crime on a regular basis or is the system just giving up on everyone. GoodVibes003
ReplyDeleteI absolutely agree with you, about our criminal justice system not being equal to everyone. Your completely right about only certain prisons have rehab sources. Because There are a lot of criminals who need help buy aren't allowed to receive it. I believe that the courts should go into depth as well with retribution. Because like you said "what if someone was close to us." I for one definitely don't want anyone I know getting hurt.-K9003
DeleteI believe that our current court system is rather good, comparing to many other nations around the world. The fact that the government put retribution higher on the objective, which would provide a sense of comfort for the public and the victim's family or friends. Our current court system may not be the most perfect system there can be, for example there may be discrimination or bias opinion that would be in play. However, as the narrator stated the different goals to a sentencing, I feel that the government have tried pretty hard to fight the goals of how a person should be sentenced. The government made different types of goals to benefit both sides or the fence. For example a person who is committed and punished for a certain crime, were expected to pay the society and the victim's family back however they can. Despite a person may be imprisoned, they are not left hanging in the prison, but instead the rehabilitation goal helps the individual to realize that what they have done is against the law and public norm, which tries to rehabilitate their minds, possibly given a chance to fit back into the society one day. Of course there are times where rehabilitation may not be met in certain prisons, such as private owned prisons, as we learned in class. Rehabilitation and loosing a inmate is bad for business of the private prisons. Despite the cons of our current system and it's possible unfairness, but this is the best we have got as of right now. I feel like the court system should be improved, but also we cannot go on with another way of sentencing an individual. The ration between good and bad of the system we have now, I feel that it is a 50:50 ration between good and bad. We got to make what we have now count and improvement to our system is definitely needed in the future. JZ003
ReplyDeleteThe number one take away I had from after watching this video was that when a court decides the sentence for an individual they have to be fair and consistent. Without consistency societies view of the criminal justice system becomes tainted and there is a lack of trust. One way that a judge stays consistent when sentencing an individual is looking at the type of crime, the seriousness of the crime, and the circumstances. These three things enable the judge to make a correct decision on the sentence for the individual. The video also discusses the six main goals of the sentencing process. The first goal of sentencing is prevention. It is the corrections goal to prevent any further crimes being committed by the individual and aiding them in their sentence. The second goal is retribution. Retribution is simply punishment. Retribution is typically one of the more sought after goals because it pleases the public. The third is Incapacitation. This is what the United States has done with the majority of criminal cases. Simply locking someone away has proven to be a perfect short-term solution. The fourth goal of sentencing is Deterrence. Deterrence has two different levels to it. The first is individual deterrence. This is when the punishment of a crime is specific to you and causes you not to commit a crime. The second form of deterrence is general deterrence. This is when a punishment for a specific crime reaches to a majority or group of people and causes them not to commit the crime. The fifth goal of sentencing is Rehabilitation. This is the sentencing goal that our criminal justice system is beginning to gravitate to wards. Rehabilitation is meant to help the criminal with their problems and place them back into society with a solution. The sixth goal of sentencing is reparation. Reparation is simply forcing an individual to pay a specific amount in cash back to those that they wronged. The video also discusses types of sentencing. One example it gives is based on community sentencing. This is when an individual is forced to have a curfew or clean up the community. Over all the three most important factors to sentencing are the type of crime that was committed, the seriousness of the crime, and the circumstances. These three things help the judge decided how to sentence the individual. -Bulls003
ReplyDeleteI like how you pointed out what interested you more about the video. I agree the way the judge decides on a sentencing they must look at the background first. But today in some cases judges dont look at if they have a record or not today the way the CRJ system work is crooked and we need help. students like us can only make it better.
DeleteRebel003
This video was very well put together. The most important thing i took away from this was that when sentencing, the courts have to stay consistent, and provide fair sentences. When the courts provide consistency to sentences, the public therefore approves of the system and is happy. If the court doesn't provide consistancy, then the public views the system as corrupt, and distrusts that the law will be enforced correctly.A way that the court system stays consistent is that the judge takes into account the following: what crime has been committed, how serious was this crime, and the situation around the crime itself. In the video, the court has several goals of sentencing. The first one is prevention. The second is retribution. Retribution just means to punish. You wronged someone, so you will be punished for your actions. The third goal is incapacitation. You simply lock them in a cell and try to forget about them. They can't commit crimes, if they are locked away. The fourth goal of sentencing is deterrence. Deterrence has multiple levels to it. the first level of deterrence is specific. This means that you saw something happen i.e. getting hit while walking across the road. You saw the incident and it deterred you from wanting to cross the street. The second part to deterrence is general. This is when a sentence reaches a large majority of people and acts like a deterrent. They will not commit the same crime, because they don't want the same sentence. The fifth goal of sentencing is rehabilitation. Rehabilitation is meant to cure the offender and make it easier for them to be reintegrated into society once they get released. the sixth goal is reparation. This means that you( the criminal) has to pay back the victim in financial means. JE003
ReplyDeleteI like how the video explains the different theories. It talks about deterrence, and how one would stop to think about the potential punishment of their action, and not commit that crime. He talks about how you cant re-offend in prison, but that people see them as unemployable when they come out. Rehabilitation is really just any effort made to reenter a criminal back into society whether it's a half way house, or through another rehab facility. First offenders are not usually imprisoned unless its a serious crime such as murder, or rape. Educational and work opportunities are offered and suggested because it keeps then from committing crime. Its used as punishment. I think that lets people off to easy. They need to learn not to commit that crime again. In my opinion there isn't really a right, or wrong way of sentencing it depends on personal preference on what you agree with.
ReplyDeleteI like how the video explains the different theories. It talks about deterrence, and how one would stop to think about the potential punishment of their action, and not commit that crime. He talks about how you cant re-offend in prison, but that people see them as unemployable when they come out. Rehabilitation is really just any effort made to reenter a criminal back into society whether it's a half way house, or through another rehab facility. First offenders are not usually imprisoned unless its a serious crime such as murder, or rape. Educational and work opportunities are offered and suggested because it keeps then from committing crime. Its used as punishment. I think that lets people off to easy. They need to learn not to commit that crime again. In my opinion there isn't really a right, or wrong way of sentencing it depends on personal preference on what you agree with. chi003
ReplyDeleteAfter watching this interesting video. It really gave me some insight on all of the different ways judges can sentence prisoners for. One thing that I read that intrigued me was that "prisoners can't reoffend in prison." I actually thought that certain crimes can make a prisoner reoffend. When he talked about prevention of crime. It really made me think about or society today with, prevention of crime and how we utilize it. Our prison system today tries to keep prisoners in jail with a lengthy time sentence, rather than letting them out early just so they can commit another crime. As we can see we're slacking in the rehabilitation area and in result of that prisoners get sent back to jail. In the video he talked about "first time offenders don't go to jail." But in Chicago alone 75% of the people they arrest are first time offenders. I'm guessing that's because they want to send a message, stating that they won't be lenient with people that commit any type of crime. With that being said I would kind of agree with and kind of not because. If they were to arrest everyone there would be no community relations at all and that is huge part in policing. But then again it would make people rethink about committing crimes.
ReplyDeleteAfter watching this interesting video. It really gave me some insight on all of the different ways judges can sentence prisoners for. One thing that I read that intrigued me was that "prisoners can't reoffend in prison." I actually thought that certain crimes can make a prisoner reoffend. When he talked about prevention of crime. It really made me think about or society today with, prevention of crime and how we utilize it. Our prison system today tries to keep prisoners in jail with a lengthy time sentence, rather than letting them out early just so they can commit another crime. As we can see we're slacking in the rehabilitation area and in result of that prisoners get sent back to jail. In the video he talked about "first time offenders don't go to jail." But in Chicago alone 75% of the people they arrest are first time offenders. I'm guessing that's because they want to send a message, stating that they won't be lenient with people that commit any type of crime. With that being said I would kind of agree with and kind of not because. If they were to arrest everyone there would be no community relations at all and that is huge part in policing. But then again it would make people rethink about committing crimes. -K9003
ReplyDeleteThis video gave me a better understanding of our processing system yet, I still feel it is a bit too much and hard to comprehend. Watching the video may be how they think things are being ran but when the terms consistent and fair are being used I think otherwise. No I don't think our court system is fair and like mentioned in class before their are other things we should be focusing on. Example given in class, we all know theirs plenty of people serving hard cord time for things that are not really dangerous to our society compared to the murders and molesters. I honestly believe that's why our murder rates are going up in the state of Illinois alone. Officers can arrest a couple males for possession of marijuana but can't get an head start on the leading suspects of the last murder a month ago. There's many ways to look at this but the most important is what ways can we change this being the "future" our professor always say. -tracker003
ReplyDeleteI feel the criminal justice system is messed up!! Like tracker003 said, we need to focus more on hard core crimes than little "petty " ones.. We arrest people lock them up with no rehabilitation and let them out, usually worse than when they went in, and expect them to be law abiding citizens. Not going to happen that's why recidivism is so high.I could so get on my soap box about this subject,and how screwed our justice system is !! However, one does not make a difference but we can join together and change the future!! MITHGHTS003
ReplyDeleteThis gave me a better idea on how all the court systems they have or had the eye for and eye i think we should keep for some crimes but we do need find a better way of puinshing people for petty crimes keep locking the bads or serious crimes people open up for rehabilitation centers get people more skills or couilcing help drug help so people dont keep returning and stop given people 20 years for little crimes but we need find a way to punish them because they did break the law but jail sometimes makes them worse but find a way that people arent locked up for 20 but still litte scared and dont want to break the law jails or prison need to get under control i think they shouldn't go in come out worse should go in come out better but thats not whats happening so we need to join together change the system save some money for the state and put some of that money to schools and parts of towns maybe put more prisoners to work more often or something but that my take cowboys003
ReplyDeleteWhen it comes to sentencing in the CRJ system the Judge have to be far and consider consistency. When giving a sentence Judges us the same traditional theories for years to come. How to determine a sentencing they may also look at previous conviction especially if its been a repeated offense. The type of sentencing are Custodial sentencing which is for most serious offense, they would be incarcerated or in prison. Community sentencing will allow offenders to do thing like community service hours or have to participate in a group meeting for drugs, alcohol or anger management. Financial sentencing is what most offenders get, meaning they have to pay for what they did the damaged they caused fines and court fees. Last but not least your Discharged case is closed and your free. When it comes to making these decisions judges have to keep in mind the "PRIDRR" (PRIDE ROGER RABBIT) Prevention, Retribution, Incapacitate, Deterrence, Rehabilitation, and Reparation.
ReplyDeleteRebel003