Cesare Beccaria is one of the earliest theorists to formulate the criminal deterrence theory. The rationality in their argument was based on the three dimensions of human thought process. He was convinced that crime was subject to rational considerations of individuals, their consciousness, and manipulability. Accordingly, an individual anticipating the charge of a crime would assume a cost-benefit inquiry and would implement the illegal plan only if probable profits adequately compensated projected costs. Under this proposal, the task of law putting into practice staffs and lawmakers was flawless. The costs, risks for an imminent criminal act had to be substantive enough to gain more than lose from committing the crime. Recently criminal deterrence theorist continues to utilize the model based on Beccaria was known as the economic model of rational actor to forecast and clarify criminal conduct (Paternoster, 2010). As asserted by the theorist, two variables are useful in examining the criminal deterrence model of utility maximization. Certainty and Severity determine the probability of conviction and severity of the punishment of an offender. When any crime decreases the severity, the punishment increases.
Inevitability and Severity
Relying on these two variables, proponents of the criminal deterrence model of utility maximization state that, as the probability of conviction or severity of punishment increases, the amount of crime decreases. Therefore, the certainty of stopping time is important as compared to the punishment bestowed to the crime. When someone is certain they are going to be arrested for a crime, they are likely to make sure they do not do the crime. Therefore, the severity of the crimes punishment does not reduce crime rates rather gives the offender a judging criterion for committing a crime. Empirically, the increasing docket of criminal cases demonstrates that avoidance has not been definite to any considerable degree (Gordon, 2007). The value of limitation cannot be established decisively because investigators employ a logical method of analysis which tries to negate theories rather than substantiate them.
Left realism and crime
This theory developed in the 80’s and is tied to the works of Lea and Young in reaction to the Marxist and Neo-Marxist methodologies. Like the Marxist the left realism is tied to the thought that capitalists’ societies are root to the development of crime. The left realism believes that gradual reforms will assist in making policies work instead of uprooting the capitalist ideals. Unlike the Marxists, they are keen to stop and prevent the existence of crime and not to overthrow capitalism (Meranze, McGowan & Garland 2011). Lea and Young are reformers and not revolutionists. According to the left realists, crime is caused by the thought where people feel they are less fortunate as compared to others. Since the standards of crime have been elevated since the 50’s crime has also taken root in the increase. The way people feel about themselves as compared to others makes them react in different dimensions making this component relative deprivation.
Left realist believes that subcultures form as a response to the social disparity. Subcultures make diversity in the society creating different groups that have differed qualities of life and thus find different types of habits keyed to their mode of lives. Marginalization is another source of crime as left realists explain where some individuals slip out of the public since they have poor education, which leads to lack of prospects, joblessness, and lack of open chances (Hawkins & Humes 2002). When one understand the theory of left realist, it becomes easy to decipher the reasons why crimes happen in the society.
The role of prison in the society
According to Clarke, crime is the consequence of collaboration between a criminal opening and an interested offender. The significance of seriously taking this opinion being conveyed by the results of a study of escaping from training schools. It establishes that running away was better described by the surroundings and administrations of the training school, which aided and provoked disappearance, than by escapees’ characters and circumstances (Eren 2015). The study consequently presented not just that situational prospects and aggravations to abscond were vital descriptive factors, but they seemed to be essential than dispositional dynamics.
Ultimately, the institutions of holding offenders should make the offenders adhere to the rule of law, unlike the way they instigate more aggravated individuals when they leave the facilities. When somebody commits an unlawful act, people deliberate that to some degree action has to be taken, since they want to be reassured, and presently, prisons are perhaps the first thing they contemplate around (McIllwain, 2015). The existence of human rights made the establishment of prisons as the most respectful form of punishment instead of a death penalty or corporal punishment. Prisons have been regarded as a source of penance and the default sanction although there are other kinds of punishments available. In the distinct, normal and secular culture, the dispossession of freedom is the most severe punishment. In many administrations across the world, there is a crisis in prisons, because of different factors including suppression, conspicuousness, authority, and lawfulness.
Violence against women and actions to curb
Feminist scholars have fashioned rich writings on violence against women, yet concept development has deteriorated. The effort to build a theory of patriarchy to elucidate violence against women was ruined by criticism. To addresses, some of these disapprovals, uncovering the illuminating strengths of this perception and lay some grounds for a more fully established theory of violence against women. The theory of patriarchy holds aptitude for speculating violence against women since it keeps the hypothetical focus on control, gender, and authority. According to Marxist theory the ruling class did not respect the women and instead oppressed them as a fact, the women were treated as second-class citizens in the society and within the family. For instance, the bourgeois saw the women as instruments of production this was the portrayal in the past. Consequently, the situation has not changed much in the modern world (Hagemann-White, 2005). Violence against women is instigated by the patriarchy. To establish actions to reduce the prevalence of this violence the need to make sure there is enough information in place is required.
Research displays that, while some influences are regularly associated with increased risk of violence against women across numerous nations, others are perspective precise and vary across countries or even in countries like between countryside and city locales. In some cases, the factors connected with a woman facing violence may be identical as those connected with a man executing violence such as low level of education and observing intra-parental viciousness as a youngster. In additional cases, the influences may vary, for instance, young age is a recognized as a risk dynamic for a woman’s probability of facing violence at the hands of a familiar partner, but not categorically for a man committing violence. To reduce this instances, increasing media campaigns and other programs that educate the students to make future generations aware that women are not to be abused.
Death penalty
Beccaria opposed death penalty asserting that life was the most precious gift that man has and the threat to life would be one of the most dreadful and the most successful. He asserted that we lose more than we gain when we subject deters to a death penalty. Instead, other punishments would suffice instead of taking the life of the criminal. The death penalty should be a relic in the society as it is detrimental to the growth of the penal system. When people are subjected to death sentence, it is a loss for the society since the penal system may have transformed the offender and produced a prodigy from the rehabilitation. As asserted by Beccaria, the value of men is vested in the way other men value the life of other men. When people hang the offenders, they weaken the other greater haven which arises from the reverence of human life (Eren, 2015). When there is respect for life, then the society will comply with the life of others and reduction of murders and life taking offenses may reduce since the moral compass has initiated the reverence of life. Capital punishment is enough to ensure the offender is subject to atonement and in the end make them change their ways. Since there are other ways to rehabilitate an offender the use of death penalty in punishment can be shunned and forgotten.