The United States has the highest number of incarceration cases in the world. The practice has been on the rise over the past decades where criminals remain behind bars especially if they underwent harsh sentences. The goal of sentencing and incarceration is deterrence, punishment, rehabilitation and incapacitation. This paper will initiate an understanding of the relationship between incarceration and deterrence that aids to reduce the repetition of the behaviors of the sex offenders who have served their sentences.
Of late, sentencing initiatives are often created to promote the deterrence influence in the justice system. The law enforcers are encouraged to become stern with the offences, use policies like the mandatory minimums, three strikes and truth in the sentencing. The new rules add that criminals may face apprehensions and enhanced sanctions to prevent them from committing the same mistakes. The question is; therefore, does the certainty or possibility of punishment work better compared to severity in offering a deterrence effect in sexual offenders (Snow 7).
According to Snow (120), the world believes that the particular group of criminals are different. Hence, they deserve the limits given to them by the US States and Courts to monitor their associations with the society for fifteen years. Some people can say that the law officials discriminate sex offenders by treating them differently from other criminals who commit serious crimes such as fraud and murder. The protests have made registrars to rethink the laws that seem to attack one specific offender. It is not appropriate to judge a person based on the past acts, but the society and the law also has a right to prevent a repeat of the sickening habit. The criminals must be monitored to ensure that they do not harm more people. The same case applies to other serious crimes.
Work cited
Snow, Robert L. Sex Crimes Investigation: Catching and Prosecuting the Perpetrators. Westport: Greenwood Publishing Group, 2006.
