匿名使用者
匿名使用者 發問時間: 社會與文化語言 · 1 0 年前

煩啊~翻不漂亮,請翻譯高手幫幫我~(二)

1.Deterrence theory holds that if criminals are indeed rational, an inverse relationship should exist between punishment and crime. The certainty of punishment seems

to deter crime. If people do not believe they will be caught, even harsh punishment may not detercrime.

2.Deterrence theory has been criticized on the grounds that it wroqgfully assumes that criminals make a rational choice before comfuitting crimes, it ignores the intricacies of the criminal justice system, and it does not take into account the social and psychological

factors that may influence criminality.Research does not validate that the death penalty reduces the murder rate.

3. Specific deterrence theory holds that the crime rate can be reduced if known offenders are punished so severely that they nevepcommit crimes again. There is little evidence

tl1atharsh punishment actually reduces the crime rate. Most prison inmates recidivate.

4.Incapacitation theory maintains that if deterrence does not work, the best course of action is to incarcerate. known offenders for long periods so that they lack criminal opportunity.Research has not proved that increasing the number of people in prison-- and increasing prison sentences-will reduce crime rates.

5.Choice theory has been influential in shaping public policy. Criminal law is designed to deter potential criminals and fairly punish those who have been caught in illegal

acts. Sometourts have changed sentencing policies to adapt to classical principles, and the U.S. correctional system seems to be aimed, at incapacitation and specific

deterrence.

6. The just desert (社會公平正義)view is that criminal sanctions should be geared precisely to the seriousness of the crime. People should be purlished on the basis of whether they deserve to be punished for what they did and not because punishment may affect or deter their future behavior. The just desert concept argues that the use

of punishment to deter or control crime is morally correct because criminals deserve to be punished for their misdeeds.

1 個解答

評分
  • 匿名使用者
    1 0 年前
    最佳解答

    1.挽留的事物理論支撐,如果罪犯的確理性,倒轉的關係應該在處罰和犯罪之間存在。 處罰的確定似乎

    制止犯罪。 如果人不相信他們將被捕捉,甚至粗糙的處罰不可能 detercrime。

    2.挽留的事物理論已經被批評在那之上理由它 wroqgfully 假定罪犯作在 comfuitting 犯罪前的理性的選擇,它不理睬犯罪的正義系統的紛亂,而且它進入帳戶社會的和心理學人之內不拿

    可能影響犯罪的因素。研究不使死刑減少謀殺率有效。

    3. 特定的挽留事物理論支撐,如果已知的罪犯被處罰,犯罪率能被減少如此的嚴重地以致於他們再一次的 nevepcommit 犯罪。 有很少的證據

    tl 1atharsh 處罰實際上減少犯罪率。 大多數的監獄入獄者 recidivate。

    4.無能力理論維持,如果挽留的事物不工作,行動的最好課程是下獄。 長的時期已知的罪犯以便他們缺乏犯罪的機會。研究沒有證明在監獄中增加人數--而且逐漸增加的監獄宣判-將減少犯罪率。

    5.精選的理論在形成公共政策方面已經是有影響的。 刑法被設計制止可能的罪犯並且公平地處罰那些已經被捕捉的人在非法的

    行為。 Sometourts 已經改變宣判政策適應古典的原則,而且美國改正的系統似乎被對準目標,在無能力和特性

    挽留的事物。

    6. 正直的荒癈(社會公平正義)視野是犯罪的制裁應該精確地適應犯罪的嚴重。 人們應該是根據他們是否該得到 purlished 為他們做的被處罰而且不因為處罰可能影響或者制止他們的將來行為。 正直的荒癈觀念主張使用

    處罰制止或者控制犯罪道德上正確因為罪犯該得到被為他們的罪行處罰。

還有問題?馬上發問,尋求解答。