Abstract
Responsibility problems for criminal justice.
Highlights
It has been argued that empirical science undermines the claim that people can deserve punishment, and that the criminal justice system ought to be radically reformed
Many philosophers and legal theorists who believe that the primary goal of the criminal justice system ought to be crime prevention rather than the dealing out of just deserts, still argue that the offenders’ desert ought to serve as a restriction on what we are allowed to do in the name of crime prevention; no one must be given more punishment than she deserves
Some philosophers and scientists do argue for the non-existence of moral responsibility and desert, roughly along the following lines: Whether an offender was morally responsible for what she did depends on how her action was caused
Summary
It has been argued that empirical science undermines the claim that people can deserve punishment, and that the criminal justice system ought to be radically reformed. Whether someone was morally responsible for an action and deserves to be praised, blamed, or punished depends on the choice she made, not the underlying causes According to PPC, many offenders are morally responsible for what they did, and would deserve to be punished, since many offenders chose to commit a crime.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
