WEEK 4 DISCUSSION ONE AND TWO RESPONSES DISCUSSION ONE CLASSMATE JOSHUA’S POST

WEEK 4 DISCUSSION ONE AND TWO RESPONSES
DISCUSSION ONE
CLASSMATE JOSHUA’S POST
Criminal Justice Policy Making 
When creating policies, criminal justice policymakers must ensure that they create fair and equitable laws that serve the needs of the people living within that society. it is important that policymakers take into consideration citizens’ rights and the rights of prisoners when creating policies to ensure that the laws they create serve the community and do not disadvantage certain groups of people or parts of the population do not end up benefiting unjustly from the creation of these policies or laws. Ethics plays a large role in ensuring that policymakers remember that the criminal justice system is a system designed to serve the people not a system to punish people unjustly. 
Mandatory Minimum Sentencing 
Certain crimes hold minimum sentencing requirements that courts must meet if an individual is charged with a particular offense. These offenses often include those who are charged with gun or drug offenses. The problem behind mandatory minimum sentencing is that it fails to take in the circumstances of the crime in question when issuing punishment for the offense. This type of one size fits all policy-making causes more harsh punishments to be issued to people that are disproportionate to their crime and make it so courts are unable to adjust the punishment to suit the individual offense. 
Three Mandatory Sentencing Policies
The policies I would believe would help ensure that crimes are fairly punished under the minimum sentencing mandate would be as follows:
1) Crimes must be evaluated for extenuating circumstances that might require individual aspects of the crime to be reviewed to ensure the severity of the crime meets the severity of the minimum punishment to be issued.
2) Courts should have the power to tailor the punishments to fit the crime committed even if the offender is only looking at minimum punishments.
3) Policymakers should be required to revisit the minimum sentencing policies quarterly to ensure that the policies are having the desired effects on crime and recidivism.
CLASSMATE SAIDY’S POST
What is a moral guideline?
A moral guideline is a rule made with ethics that should followed. Moral guidelines are needed when policies are made to have them effectively working without chaos. Moral guidelines should be formed by groups of experts and “right-thinking people” that take moral positions, make judgments, and suggest how the threat should be coped with.
 
Moral Guidelines and Criminal Justice
When creating criminal justice policies with morality policy makers should act ethically and have consideration towards everyone. Moral guidelines should be easy to make if everyone involved with making the policy has morals. Advocacy group groups should incorporate the views of the people. Guidelines should not involve personal experiences or feelings, though moral principles on human life should be included. Sometimes moral guidelines have to be made based on and guided from past experiences and how these guidelines will help or prevent criminal situations from occurring. For example in a situation like the “three strike rule”, this then expresses toughness on criminals and potential consequences. 
 
Mandatory Minimum Sentencing & Three Moral Guidelines for an Effective Policy
The three-strikes legislation, mandates the punishment of life imprisonment without parole for offenders convicted for a third time of specified violent or serious felonies (Banks, C. 2016). This is to make the offender aware that the next conviction will result in life imprisonment. This will allow offenders to consider the consequences of committing a further offense. The first guideline I would suggest is to research previous crimes and what actions were taken to avoid them from reoccurring. Second, if recidivism is shown for offenders, there should be alternatives that’ll help with crimes. Instead of jail time there should be programs that help with specific crime that the offender continues to commit. This would help lower prison rates but also with the habilitation. Lastly, racial bias should not be implicated on crime control, everyone should get same sentencing guidelines no matter the race. 
Reference:
Banks, C. (2016). Criminal justice ethics: Theory and practice (4th ed.). Retrieved from https://content.ashford.edu
PROFESSOR’S RESPONSE TO MY POST
Thank you for your post.  I am glad you chose truth in sentencing, because something needs to be done.  As expected, the public demands are high for our officials charged with protecting us, and it seems that at times the general public does not understand that controlling the behavior of people with bad intent is a difficult task.  When you sentence somebody to a long sentence as a deterrence measure and then let them out after only a few years, deterrence fails.  With truth in sentencing laws this should be closed as times served should closely match the time sentenced.  However, let me ask.  With truth in sentencing laws, does this allow a proper level of encouragement for prisoners to do good and behave for the hope of early release?  Can early release be expected with truth in sentencing laws?
DISCUSSION TWO
CLASSMATE KELSEA’S POST
Capital Punishment in the United States
Capital punishment exists in the US as it is authorized in the Constitution as long as the offender was provided due process of the law, additionally the punishment must fit the crime (Banks, 2016). In 1791 punishment practices were often barbaric but considered the norm at the time but when viewed but the standards of today they are considered cruel. Due to the evolvement of society, it is necessary that the philosophy on cruel and unusual punishment has changed as well. Forms of capital punishment evolved from public hangings, gas chambers, electrocutions or even firing squads (Acker, 2003).  In Gregg v. Georgia the Court held that the careful and judicious use of the death penalty can be appropriate if it is carefully employed and that in extreme criminal cases the punishment of death does not violate the Eighth Amendment (Gregg v. Georgia, n.d.). It was at this time the court determined that the death penalty can serve as a useful deterrent because if people understand the implications of their actions can have serious consequences, they are less likely to commit the crimes that may receive this as a punishment.  The use of capital punishment is subjected to the decision of the court on what crimes fit the punishment of death. For example, in Coker v. Georgia the Court decided that a death penalty sentencing for the crime of rape was “grossly disproportionate” to the actual crime committed (Coker v. Georgia, n.d.).
Best argument in support
The best argument in support for capital punishment is that it ensures there is no likelihood for reoccurrence. The idea surrounding capital punishment is that it will serve as a deterrence method, if the reward (the crime) is not worth the risk (death) one will not take the risk. If this fails and an individual still decides to take that risk and are found guilty who is to say they wont do it again if let out.
How can this overcome the logical fallacy “two wrongs make a right”
When I was young the very first question, I had about the death penalty was how it is okay for one person to take the life of someone else as a punishment for them doing the same. In my head I could not understand how we know that murder is wrong yet the executioner will be ending the offenders life as well. This is still something I battle with due to high numbers of individuals who have been proven innocent that have sat on death row. With this aside, I think the idea behind capital punishment can overcome this logical fallacy because it can protect the greater good. If taking the life of one person can save the life of three it seems the logical choice.
References
ACKER, J. (2003). The Death Penalty: An American History. Contemporary Justice Review, 6(2), 169–187. https://doi-org.proxy-library.ashford.edu/10.1080/10282580302707 (Links to an external site.)
Banks, C. (2016). Criminal justice ethics: Theory and practice (4th ed.). Retrieved from https://content.ashford.edu 
Gregg v. Georgia (n.d.) Oyez Retrieved September 9, 2021 from https://www.oyez.org/cases/1975/74-6257
CLASSMATE JESSALYN’S POST
Week Four-Discussion Two-Ethics, Logic and Capital Punishment 
Capital Punishment Implementations 
Capital punishment is a widely controversial topic and people are both for it and against it.  According to Pew Research Center, 6 out of 10 people are in favor/agree with the death penalty.  During the same study that occurred in April 2021, 64% of people believe that the death penalty is morally justified when the crime is murder itself (Gramlich, 2021).  Currently there are 27 states that have the death penalty.  There have been some states over the past decade that have abolished the death penalty and replaced it with life in prison with no chance of parole (Mcinnes, 2021).  Some states think that capital punishment is a violation of rights and unconstitutional.  People can stay on death row for decades.  A lot of people commit murder out of a crime of passion or out of the heart of passion.  Therefore, they are not thinking about the death penalty so many believe that the death penalty does not deter crime (The Death Penalty, n.d.).    Capital punishment faces the morality issue. Some think the punishment must be equal to the crime which is where an eye for an eye or a death for a death come into play (Banks,2016, section. 9.8).  Others believe that death is the easy way out and it is more of a punishment to live the remainder of one’s life behind 4 walls and bars.   
Arguments in Favor 
Many would say that if the justice system deems the death penalty fit that they must have a good reason.  Also, when we give the death penalty it deters the person who committed the crime.  Mainly because they are no longer alive.  However, the same could be said for life without parole.  This would make sure the crimes do not continue.  However, like previously mentioned, it does not often deter people because they commit these murders so spontaneously and without thinking that it is too late, the crime is already done without thought of consequence.  People want retribution and retaliation for the lose of their loved ones.  I can understand that.  But then you leave a new set of loved ones who lose a person.  Often we see the family members forgiving the perpetrators.  I think they have to forgive them to get some kid of peace.  I honestly would not want to be in that position.  The whole topic is tough. 
Logic Against Two Wrongs Make a Right 
The saying two wrongs don’t make a right is often heard.  Basically, what that means is that just because someone kills someone you love, that does not make it right to take their life.  The saying an eye for an eye describes the same thing.  Committing a crime to make up for someone else’s crime does not fix anything. To say that two wrongs make a right is not sound and unethical.  I can see why some people believe eye for eye.  Especially if they have lost someone or felt the pain themselves.  However, there are certain rules and regulations and ethics that must be upheld.  Capital punishment is not right for someone who shoplifts.  Even so, someone steals something from you, stealing something from them does not make it right.  Capital punishment deals with people’s lives.  This is not something that we can take lightly.    There are some countries that believe in equal punishments like an eye for an eye.  You take a life; your life is than taken.   It is only fair, right?  But what about innocent people?  There is no way to correct a wrongful death penalty suit that has been carried out.  So, an innocent person has lost their life.  
I am not sure where I stand on the matter.  I suppose it would be a circumstance type thing.  Because I can see where people would think that someone who raped and murdered a child should get death.  That is why this topic is always going to be touchy and there will never be one consensus.   
References 
Banks, C. (2016). Criminal justice ethics: Theory and practice (4th ed.). Retrieved from https://content.ashford.edu 
Gramlich, J. (2021, July 20). 10 facts about the death penalty in the U.S. Retrieved September 8, 2021, from https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/07/19/10-facts-about-the-death-penalty-in-the-u-s/ (Links to an external site.) 
Mcinnes, K. (2021, August 11). States and Capital Punishment. Retrieved September 9, 2021, from https://www.ncsl.org/research/civil-and-criminal-justice/death-penalty.aspx (Links to an external site.) 
The Death Penalty: Questions and Answers. (n.d.). Retrieved September 9, 2021, from https://www.aclu.org/other/death-penalty-questions-and-answers

Calculate the price of your order

550 words
We'll send you the first draft for approval by September 11, 2018 at 10:52 AM
Total price:
$26
The price is based on these factors:
Academic level
Number of pages
Urgency
Basic features
  • Free title page and bibliography
  • Unlimited revisions
  • Plagiarism-free guarantee
  • Money-back guarantee
  • 24/7 support
On-demand options
  • Writer’s samples
  • Part-by-part delivery
  • Overnight delivery
  • Copies of used sources
  • Expert Proofreading
Paper format
  • 275 words per page
  • 12 pt Arial/Times New Roman
  • Double line spacing
  • Any citation style (APA, MLA, Chicago/Turabian, Harvard)

Our guarantees

Delivering a high-quality product at a reasonable price is not enough anymore.
That’s why we have developed 5 beneficial guarantees that will make your experience with our service enjoyable, easy, and safe.

Money-back guarantee

You have to be 100% sure of the quality of your product to give a money-back guarantee. This describes us perfectly. Make sure that this guarantee is totally transparent.

Read more

Zero-plagiarism guarantee

Each paper is composed from scratch, according to your instructions. It is then checked by our plagiarism-detection software. There is no gap where plagiarism could squeeze in.

Read more

Free-revision policy

Thanks to our free revisions, there is no way for you to be unsatisfied. We will work on your paper until you are completely happy with the result.

Read more

Privacy policy

Your email is safe, as we store it according to international data protection rules. Your bank details are secure, as we use only reliable payment systems.

Read more

Fair-cooperation guarantee

By sending us your money, you buy the service we provide. Check out our terms and conditions if you prefer business talks to be laid out in official language.

Read more