The main thing in this video that stuck out as important to me was Cesare Beccaria’s thought that a crime’s punishment should be calculated by how severe the crime was. I agree with this in every possible way. I have heard of many occasions where people do small pity crimes, generally delinquents, and they will sometimes face years in prison or in a juvenile justice center. To me that is unfair, being a young child, stealing or fighting should not result in years in an adult prison where you can be assaulted and therefore hurt more. On the other hand, I have heard of murder crimes where the criminal gets charged with life, or life without the possibility of parole. I understand that this is a hefty punishment, but if one is bad enough to take the life of another human, I believe their punishment should be to lose their life as well. To me the death penalty for murders is a perfect example of what Cesare Beccaria was thinking. During Beccaria’s time crime was seen as a sin, and because of that criminals were set to more severe punishments which included torture. In today’s age the law enforcement cannot go in that direction due to the multiple different religions and belief systems in the United States today. I believe in Beccaria’s idea that punishment should be decided by the severity of the crime, and hopefully in the future the U.S will begin using this more. -LW001
Cesare Beccaria is the original founder of classical criminology. He focused a lot on the ideas of free will, as well as rationally calculating the costs and the benefits of one’s actions. At the time that Beccaria was doing his studies, in Europe, the criminal justice system was going off of a demonic kind of perspective. Criminal justice officials and law enforcement would basically act in place of God when it came to punishing criminals. With that spiritual kind of approach came really gross, violent, unnecessary punishments, which led to Beccaria’s protest and his passion to change that whole idea. In every way I agree with Beccaria’s idea that punishment should fit the crime committed. There should never be one overarching punishment for crime as a whole. What I mean is that a competent adult killing another individual should not be punished in the same way, or even close to the same way, as a child accidentally firing a fun and killing someone. Furthermore, there should be a more severe punishment for a rapist than there is for an individual that stole a loaf of bread or sold marijuana to make some extra money. I completely agree that the severity of a punishment should be based off of the severity of the crime committed. Beccaria really paved the way for modern day criminologists and has played a huge role in how our criminal justice system functions still today. -psych001
It was kind of interesting how in the mid 17th century how much of a reform on the criminal justice system was sort of forming into our ideal system today. I didn’t know that the book he wrote was the possibly fundamentals and ideals our founding forefathers used as the basis for the constitution for separation of British rule along with the ideals of the French revolution. We needed to move away from the old draconian criminal system because it just seemed inhumane. We needed a system that would suffer the mind instead of the body. That would put more on prevention and deterrence of crimes being committed. His idea of giving to the law into giving to the legislators to fit the crime to specific punishment made it unique in a away that not all punishments would be the same. That fact that he was against capital punishment surprised me because I think that if someone does the most evil of all which is murder the criminal should be punished for taking another life. The Catholic church condemned this book wasn’t a big shock to me because most of the time back then we were slowly changing from religious law to something more modern. Navy001
Cesare Beccaria (1738-1794) was more of a free-will, rationalistic hedonism and rational calculation of costs and benefits. The spiritualist approach dominated European thinking for more than a thousand year. It was associated with gruesome tourties, the state claimed it was acting in the place of god. Classical criminology was a protest against unjust policies on Europe. His writing was widely accepted by intellectuals. Initially, it was not accepted by politically powerful groups that rules throughout europe. Beccaria was a protest writer, his work may have been influenced by the American Revolution of 1776, as well as the French Revolution. Becarria was 26 years old when he was asked to write an essay on penology. At the time, he knew nothing about penology, but he proposed various practical reforms and he objected to capricious and purely personal forms of justice. History is very interesting when it comes to criminal law. You know, everyone and everything has to start somewhere. So many things have changed or have grown over time. -PB001
This video talks about Cesare Beccaria and how he is the original founder of classical criminology. He argued that punishment should be proportional to the seriousness of the offenses so that the cost of crime always exceeds its rewards and this approach became the basis for all modern criminal justice systems. Which basically meant that the crime should fit the punishment. Becca was a protest writer who wanted to change the excessive and cruel punishments by applying the rationalist social contract ideas to crime and criminal justice. There was evidence that his works influenced the American Revolution of 1776, as well as the French Revolution. In his book stated that “ judges should follow the law and that they should have so discretion whatsoever.” Even though the book was written over two hundred years ago it’s crazy to see we still use those same rules. Criminal justice officials and law enforcement would basically act in place of God when it came to punishing criminals. Which a lot of people didn't agree with. I was surprised to see that Beccaria was against capital punishment. I feel some people deserve to have the death penalty for certain crimes. Like people who caused mass shootings. Batman001
Becarria = rational calculation of costs and benefits. He wanted to make sure that cost of crime always exceeds its rewards. There was demonic perspective that Europeans had and classical criminology was a protest against unjust policies in Europe. Because crime was looked at as a sin, the authority of Europe used that as a reason to use gruesome punishment on those that committed it. Becarria’s writing was accepted by intellectuals but the politically powerful rejected the ideas. Becarria’s work may have influenced the American Revolution and the French Revolution. “There is evidence that some of the ideas he provided were very popular ideas and may have inspired our founding fathers.” Becarria was asked to write an essay on penology and he knew NOTHING about it. He proposed many reforms in this essay. The essay was the start of him writing his book. Key points in Becarria’s book: Legislators should define crimes, as well as specific punishments. 2) Judges should follow the law. They should have no discretion whatsoever. 3) Excessive severity FAILS TO DETER CRIME and may actually INCREASE it. 4) Seriousness of a crime is determined by the extent of harm that it inflicts on society. INTENT OF THE OFFENDER is important as well. 5) Punishments should be certain. 6) purpose of punishment is: TO DETER CRIME 6) Laws should be published THE CATHOLIC CHURCH PUT HIS BOOK IN THE FORBIDDEN BOOKS
I think it is crazy, and as I've seen in some of these responses as well, that if Beccaria did not write what he wrote and get his ideas out there the world may have not been influenced. Law enforcement would be acting in the place of God and every UNJUST action would be excused by them just because they are supposedly working in Gods place. ~TanLionNala001
For this video, it shows a powerpoint on Cesare Beccaria who was associated with Classical Criminology. The basis of classical criminology was a protest against the criminal justice policies in Europe. Beccaria’s writings were mostly protesting ideas that may have inspired the United States founding fathers. The speaker explains a book that Beccaria wrote when he was younger about prisons and he shows what some of the interesting points in the book. The first one Beccaria stated was that legislators should specifically define the crime and the punishment for each crime. I agree with this key point because it makes it fair for everyone when they have a detailed version of what the crime and punishment are. The second main point from Beccaria’s book was that judges should just follow the law and they should not have any discretion. I am both sided with this point because I believe that if judges are allowed discretion they might take advantage of it in the wrong way but if they don’t have discretion they are forced to follow a law that could potentially cause future problems. Another point Beccaria makes is about the severity of punishment and how it can actually increase crime because if a juvenile knows how severe the crime will be for one crime, they try to commit other crimes so they don’t have severe punishment for only one crime. -HL001
After watching this video, I learned that Cesare Beccaria gave the idea of rational calculation of costs and benefits. I do agree with his idea that punishment should be proportional to the seriousness of offenses, which became the basis for all modern criminal justice systems. Criminal justice officials act in place of God to punish criminals with gruesome torture and draconian punishments. I found out that Beccaria is a protest writer that want to change the excessive and cruel punishment. It was interesting to know that in the middle of the seventeenth century, Beccaria was starting to form the ideas of the criminal justice system today. His idea came out before the American Revolution and Independence. I do like that his ideas 200 plus years ago are being used in today’s criminal justice systems. Legislators do pass and create laws, Judges to determine guilt whether the defendant committed the crime. Judges should have no discretion whatsoever. At this point, I agree and disagree about the seriousness of the crime, for the reason that if the crime does not include intent to harm, punishment should not be severe. His idea about crime punishment is true, and it is not to punish but to deter crime. Cesare Beccaria did pave the modern-day criminologist and justice system. -Cancun001
Cesare Beccaria lived from 1738 to 1794. Beccaria believed in free will, rationalistic hedonism. Human choice is solely based on rational calculation of costs and benefits. Punishments to crimes need to be proportional. Crime for a long time has been identified with sin, or manifesting with the devil. This is where the state stepped in and claims to play the role of God, this is why punishments have been so harsh in the past. Beccaria’s work influenced the American Revolution of 1776 and the French Revolution. Beccaria believed and wrote about seven different main topics that many would never speak about. The legislature should define crime and specify the punishment. People should be aware of what is considered to be a crime and how they will be treated after committing any such crime. Judges need to follow the law, if they are going to have a say in my ;punishment i want them to have to follow the same rules. Excessive severity will not deter crime, it actually may increase it. If someone is going to receive such a severe crime, why not do the maximum amount of bad. The seriousness of the crime will be determined by how much harm was done to the society. Punishments should always be certain or nobody would follow the rules. The main purpose of punishment is to deter crime. Laws should be published so that the public is aware of crimes and punishments. -KF001
Cesare Beccaria was the original founder of the idea of classical criminology with the idea that the punishment should be proportional to the series of offenses so the that cost of an offense exceeds what the crime was worth. The original ideas that crime was the work of the devil caused many punishments to be very gruesome and that was what Beccaria was out to protest. He did not believe in that form of thinking and wanted to implement rational social contract ideas which was a very big turning point. He was a very influential man as seen by some documents that prove he may have influenced the American and French revolutions. I disagree with him when he wrote that judges should have no discretion whatsoever. I do not think that is a very good idea due to what that could result in with our prison populations. The only times I believe that there should no be any discretion given to the judges would be for sentencing individuals who commit evil acts against other people, such as shootings. He had a very interesting way of thinking though when considering punishments regarding crime. An instance that is interesting with the idea of the certainty of punishment to deter crime which is now one of he strongest deterrence methods. -Blues001
The main thing in this video that stuck out as important to me was Cesare Beccaria’s thought that a crime’s punishment should be calculated by how severe the crime was. I agree with this in every possible way. I have heard of many occasions where people do small pity crimes, generally delinquents, and they will sometimes face years in prison or in a juvenile justice center. To me that is unfair, being a young child, stealing or fighting should not result in years in an adult prison where you can be assaulted and therefore hurt more. On the other hand, I have heard of murder crimes where the criminal gets charged with life, or life without the possibility of parole. I understand that this is a hefty punishment, but if one is bad enough to take the life of another human, I believe their punishment should be to lose their life as well. To me the death penalty for murders is a perfect example of what Cesare Beccaria was thinking. During Beccaria’s time crime was seen as a sin, and because of that criminals were set to more severe punishments which included torture. In today’s age the law enforcement cannot go in that direction due to the multiple different religions and belief systems in the United States today. I believe in Beccaria’s idea that punishment should be decided by the severity of the crime, and hopefully in the future the U.S will begin using this more. -LW001
ReplyDeleteCesare Beccaria is the original founder of classical criminology. He focused a lot on the ideas of free will, as well as rationally calculating the costs and the benefits of one’s actions. At the time that Beccaria was doing his studies, in Europe, the criminal justice system was going off of a demonic kind of perspective. Criminal justice officials and law enforcement would basically act in place of God when it came to punishing criminals. With that spiritual kind of approach came really gross, violent, unnecessary punishments, which led to Beccaria’s protest and his passion to change that whole idea. In every way I agree with Beccaria’s idea that punishment should fit the crime committed. There should never be one overarching punishment for crime as a whole. What I mean is that a competent adult killing another individual should not be punished in the same way, or even close to the same way, as a child accidentally firing a fun and killing someone. Furthermore, there should be a more severe punishment for a rapist than there is for an individual that stole a loaf of bread or sold marijuana to make some extra money. I completely agree that the severity of a punishment should be based off of the severity of the crime committed. Beccaria really paved the way for modern day criminologists and has played a huge role in how our criminal justice system functions still today. -psych001
ReplyDeleteIt was kind of interesting how in the mid 17th century how much of a reform on the criminal justice system was sort of forming into our ideal system today. I didn’t know that the book he wrote was the possibly fundamentals and ideals our founding forefathers used as the basis for the constitution for separation of British rule along with the ideals of the French revolution. We needed to move away from the old draconian criminal system because it just seemed inhumane. We needed a system that would suffer the mind instead of the body. That would put more on prevention and deterrence of crimes being committed. His idea of giving to the law into giving to the legislators to fit the crime to specific punishment made it unique in a away that not all punishments would be the same. That fact that he was against capital punishment surprised me because I think that if someone does the most evil of all which is murder the criminal should be punished for taking another life. The Catholic church condemned this book wasn’t a big shock to me because most of the time back then we were slowly changing from religious law to something more modern. Navy001
ReplyDeleteCesare Beccaria (1738-1794) was more of a free-will, rationalistic hedonism and rational calculation of costs and benefits. The spiritualist approach dominated European thinking for more than a thousand year. It was associated with gruesome tourties, the state claimed it was acting in the place of god. Classical criminology was a protest against unjust policies on Europe. His writing was widely accepted by intellectuals. Initially, it was not accepted by politically powerful groups that rules throughout europe. Beccaria was a protest writer, his work may have been influenced by the American Revolution of 1776, as well as the French Revolution. Becarria was 26 years old when he was asked to write an essay on penology. At the time, he knew nothing about penology, but he proposed various practical reforms and he objected to capricious and purely personal forms of justice. History is very interesting when it comes to criminal law. You know, everyone and everything has to start somewhere. So many things have changed or have grown over time. -PB001
ReplyDeleteThis video talks about Cesare Beccaria and how he is the original founder of classical criminology. He argued that punishment should be proportional to the seriousness of the offenses so that the cost of crime always exceeds its rewards and this approach became the basis for all modern criminal justice systems. Which basically meant that the crime should fit the punishment. Becca was a protest writer who wanted to change the excessive and cruel punishments by applying the rationalist social contract ideas to crime and criminal justice. There was evidence that his works influenced the American Revolution of 1776, as well as the French Revolution. In his book stated that “ judges should follow the law and that they should have so discretion whatsoever.” Even though the book was written over two hundred years ago it’s crazy to see we still use those same rules. Criminal justice officials and law enforcement would basically act in place of God when it came to punishing criminals. Which a lot of people didn't agree with. I was surprised to see that Beccaria was against capital punishment. I feel some people deserve to have the death penalty for certain crimes. Like people who caused mass shootings. Batman001
ReplyDeleteBecarria = rational calculation of costs and benefits. He wanted to make sure that cost of crime always exceeds its rewards. There was demonic perspective that Europeans had and classical criminology was a protest against unjust policies in Europe. Because crime was looked at as a sin, the authority of Europe used that as a reason to use gruesome punishment on those that committed it. Becarria’s writing was accepted by intellectuals but the politically powerful rejected the ideas. Becarria’s work may have influenced the American Revolution and the French Revolution. “There is evidence that some of the ideas he provided were very popular ideas and may have inspired our founding fathers.” Becarria was asked to write an essay on penology and he knew NOTHING about it. He proposed many reforms in this essay. The essay was the start of him writing his book. Key points in Becarria’s book: Legislators should define crimes, as well as specific punishments. 2) Judges should follow the law. They should have no discretion whatsoever. 3) Excessive severity FAILS TO DETER CRIME and may actually INCREASE it. 4) Seriousness of a crime is determined by the extent of harm that it inflicts on society. INTENT OF THE OFFENDER is important as well. 5) Punishments should be certain. 6) purpose of punishment is: TO DETER CRIME 6) Laws should be published THE CATHOLIC CHURCH PUT HIS BOOK IN THE FORBIDDEN BOOKS
ReplyDeleteI think it is crazy, and as I've seen in some of these responses as well, that if Beccaria did not write what he wrote and get his ideas out there the world may have not been influenced. Law enforcement would be acting in the place of God and every UNJUST action would be excused by them just because they are supposedly working in Gods place.
~TanLionNala001
For this video, it shows a powerpoint on Cesare Beccaria who was associated with Classical Criminology. The basis of classical criminology was a protest against the criminal justice policies in Europe. Beccaria’s writings were mostly protesting ideas that may have inspired the United States founding fathers. The speaker explains a book that Beccaria wrote when he was younger about prisons and he shows what some of the interesting points in the book. The first one Beccaria stated was that legislators should specifically define the crime and the punishment for each crime. I agree with this key point because it makes it fair for everyone when they have a detailed version of what the crime and punishment are. The second main point from Beccaria’s book was that judges should just follow the law and they should not have any discretion. I am both sided with this point because I believe that if judges are allowed discretion they might take advantage of it in the wrong way but if they don’t have discretion they are forced to follow a law that could potentially cause future problems. Another point Beccaria makes is about the severity of punishment and how it can actually increase crime because if a juvenile knows how severe the crime will be for one crime, they try to commit other crimes so they don’t have severe punishment for only one crime. -HL001
ReplyDeleteAfter watching this video, I learned that Cesare Beccaria gave the idea of rational calculation of costs and benefits. I do agree with his idea that punishment should be proportional to the seriousness of offenses, which became the basis for all modern criminal justice systems. Criminal justice officials act in place of God to punish criminals with gruesome torture and draconian punishments. I found out that Beccaria is a protest writer that want to change the excessive and cruel punishment. It was interesting to know that in the middle of the seventeenth century, Beccaria was starting to form the ideas of the criminal justice system today. His idea came out before the American Revolution and Independence. I do like that his ideas 200 plus years ago are being used in today’s criminal justice systems. Legislators do pass and create laws, Judges to determine guilt whether the defendant committed the crime. Judges should have no discretion whatsoever. At this point, I agree and disagree about the seriousness of the crime, for the reason that if the crime does not include intent to harm, punishment should not be severe. His idea about crime punishment is true, and it is not to punish but to deter crime. Cesare Beccaria did pave the modern-day criminologist and justice system. -Cancun001
ReplyDeleteCesare Beccaria lived from 1738 to 1794. Beccaria believed in free will, rationalistic hedonism. Human choice is solely based on rational calculation of costs and benefits. Punishments to crimes need to be proportional. Crime for a long time has been identified with sin, or manifesting with the devil. This is where the state stepped in and claims to play the role of God, this is why punishments have been so harsh in the past. Beccaria’s work influenced the American Revolution of 1776 and the French Revolution. Beccaria believed and wrote about seven different main topics that many would never speak about. The legislature should define crime and specify the punishment. People should be aware of what is considered to be a crime and how they will be treated after committing any such crime. Judges need to follow the law, if they are going to have a say in my ;punishment i want them to have to follow the same rules. Excessive severity will not deter crime, it actually may increase it. If someone is going to receive such a severe crime, why not do the maximum amount of bad. The seriousness of the crime will be determined by how much harm was done to the society. Punishments should always be certain or nobody would follow the rules. The main purpose of punishment is to deter crime. Laws should be published so that the public is aware of crimes and punishments.
ReplyDelete-KF001
Cesare Beccaria was the original founder of the idea of classical criminology with the idea that the punishment should be proportional to the series of offenses so the that cost of an offense exceeds what the crime was worth. The original ideas that crime was the work of the devil caused many punishments to be very gruesome and that was what Beccaria was out to protest. He did not believe in that form of thinking and wanted to implement rational social contract ideas which was a very big turning point. He was a very influential man as seen by some documents that prove he may have influenced the American and French revolutions. I disagree with him when he wrote that judges should have no discretion whatsoever. I do not think that is a very good idea due to what that could result in with our prison populations. The only times I believe that there should no be any discretion given to the judges would be for sentencing individuals who commit evil acts against other people, such as shootings. He had a very interesting way of thinking though when considering punishments regarding crime. An instance that is interesting with the idea of the certainty of punishment to deter crime which is now one of he strongest deterrence methods. -Blues001
ReplyDelete