Retributivism, Penal Censure, and Life Imprisonment without Parole

Q2 Social Sciences Criminal Justice Ethics Pub Date : 2019-01-02 DOI:10.1080/0731129X.2019.1600289
Netanel Dagan, Julian V. Roberts
{"title":"Retributivism, Penal Censure, and Life Imprisonment without Parole","authors":"Netanel Dagan, Julian V. Roberts","doi":"10.1080/0731129X.2019.1600289","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article advances a censure-based case against sentences of life imprisonment without the possibility of parole. Our argument justifies a retributive “second look” assessment of long-term prison sentences. The article focuses on the censuring element of long-term prison sentences while reconceptualizing penal censure as a dynamic and responsive concept. By doing so, the article explores the significance of the prisoner’s life after sentencing (largely ignored by retributivists) and promotes a more nuanced approach to censure-based proportionality. Policy-makers may welcome this approach as a way to control excessive prison sentences while remaining within a retributive penal framework. Although we are making a general argument about the need for responsive censure within a retributive sentencing regime, the case for this approach is particularly compelling at the present time. Almost all Western nations, and particularly the US, impose very lengthy, often life sentences of imprisonment for a wide range of offences, thereby affecting large numbers of prisoners.","PeriodicalId":35931,"journal":{"name":"Criminal Justice Ethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/0731129X.2019.1600289","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Criminal Justice Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0731129X.2019.1600289","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

This article advances a censure-based case against sentences of life imprisonment without the possibility of parole. Our argument justifies a retributive “second look” assessment of long-term prison sentences. The article focuses on the censuring element of long-term prison sentences while reconceptualizing penal censure as a dynamic and responsive concept. By doing so, the article explores the significance of the prisoner’s life after sentencing (largely ignored by retributivists) and promotes a more nuanced approach to censure-based proportionality. Policy-makers may welcome this approach as a way to control excessive prison sentences while remaining within a retributive penal framework. Although we are making a general argument about the need for responsive censure within a retributive sentencing regime, the case for this approach is particularly compelling at the present time. Almost all Western nations, and particularly the US, impose very lengthy, often life sentences of imprisonment for a wide range of offences, thereby affecting large numbers of prisoners.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
惩罚主义、刑罚审查与无假释终身监禁
本文提出了一个基于谴责的案件,反对无假释可能的终身监禁判决。我们的论点证明了对长期监禁判决进行报复性的“重新审视”评估是合理的。本文着重于长期监禁刑罚的谴责要素,同时将刑事谴责重新定义为一个动态的、响应性的概念。通过这样做,文章探讨了囚犯在判刑后的生活意义(在很大程度上被报复主义者忽视),并提倡对基于谴责的相称性采取更微妙的方法。政策制定者可能会欢迎这种做法,将其作为一种控制过度监禁的方式,同时保持在惩罚性刑罚框架内。尽管我们正在就在报复性量刑制度中进行回应性谴责的必要性进行一般性辩论,但目前这种做法的理由尤其令人信服。几乎所有西方国家,尤其是美国,都对各种罪行判处非常长的、往往是无期徒刑,从而影响到大量囚犯。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Criminal Justice Ethics
Criminal Justice Ethics Social Sciences-Law
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
11
期刊最新文献
Exposing, Reversing, and Inheriting Crimes as Traumas from the Neurosciences to Epigenetics: Why Criminal Law Cannot Yet Afford A(nother) Biology-induced Overhaul Institutional Corruption, Institutional Corrosion and Collective Responsibility Sentencing, Artificial Intelligence, and Condemnation: A Reply to Taylor Double Jeopardy, Autrefois Acquit and the Legal Ethics of the Rule Against Unreasonably Splitting a Case Ethical Resource Allocation in Policing: Why Policing Requires a Different Approach from Healthcare
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1