共查询到20条相似文献,搜索用时 15 毫秒
1.
2.
Orth U 《Law and human behavior》2003,27(2):173-186
Research on subjective punishment goals has focused on the perspective of third-party observers of criminal offenses and neglected the perspective of victims. This study investigates punishment goals among 174 adult crime victims (rape and nonsexual assault) for each participant's real criminal case. Scales measuring support for punishment goals are constructed by factor analysis of an 18-item list. Results show that 5 highly supported goals can be distinguished: retaliation, recognition of victim status, confirmation of societal values, victim security, and societal security. Analysis of relations between punishment goal scales and personal variables, situational variables, and demanded punishment severity corroborates the view that the punishment goals revealed can be classified according to the two independent dichotomies of moral versus instrumental goals, and micro versus macro goals. 相似文献
3.
Our purpose in this paper is to consider a procedural objection to the death penalty. According to this objection, even if
the death penalty is deemed, substantively speaking, a morally acceptable punishment for at least some murderers, since only
a small proportion of those guilty of aggravated murder are sentenced to death and executed, while the majority of murderers
escape capital punishment as a result of arbitrariness and discrimination, capital punishment should be abolished. Our targets
in this paper are two recent attempts, by Thomas Hurka and Michael Cholbi respectively, to defend the view that ‘levelling
down’ (that is, reducing the punishment imposed on a criminal from the punishment he absolutely deserves to a less severe
punishment in order to achieve proportionality relative to the criminals who have escaped the punishment they absolutely deserve)
is, in the context of capital punishment, morally permissible. We argue that both Hurka and Cholbi fail to show why the arbitrariness
and discrimination objection impugns the death penalty.
相似文献
Douglas FarlandEmail: |
4.
《现代法学》2021,(1):186-198
环境问题的发展客观上导致了环境法律责任理论和实践对惩罚的过分倚重,当前,环境民事责任、行政责任和刑事责任都有明显加重惩罚的倾向。但是,重罚思路并未取得预期的环境保护效果,在理论上也缺乏逻辑基础且背离主流导向,需要及时矫正以避免制度失败和导致社会不公。应当全面认识法律责任的惩罚、补偿和预防功能,承认惩罚性责任在环境法律实施中的基础性作用,同时认清其局限性;准确认识补偿性责任在环境法中的实现方式和作用空间,以及预防性环境法律责任的有限性及必要性。进而,以环境保护秩序维护和环境利益保护为目标,充分发挥不同法律责任方式的功能、合理配置法律责任规则,在明确分工的基础上建立环境法律责任之间的有机联系,方可形成功能协调的环境法律责任体系保障环境法的实施。 相似文献
5.
公正高效权威的有机统一构成了我国社会主义司法制度的目标,如何从我国的国情出发,正确认识构成司法目标各要素的内涵及相互间的关系,对司法目标的实现至关重要。 相似文献
6.
Pey-Woan Lee 《The Modern law review》2007,70(6):887-907
This article re-examines the established principle that contract damages compensate but do not punish from the theoretical perspective of corrective justice and, in particular, the version advocated by Professor Ernest Weinrib. Weinrib argues that corrective justice affirms the traditional view that contract damages should be circumscribed by compensatory functions, and the notion of punitive damages is inconsistent with the structure of corrective justice and hence contractual rights. The correctness of this conclusion depends, however, on what is understood by punishment. This article argues that punishment is not necessarily explicable only as a form of state punishment, but may (adopting the retributive idea of punishment expounded by Jane Hampton) also be understood as a form of correlatively-structured response that redresses the moral injury inflicted by one's conduct on another. If that is the case, punitive damages for breach of contract may be justified even within the framework of corrective justice. 相似文献
7.
ALAN NORRIE 《Ratio juris》1989,2(3):227-239
Abstract. The modern interpretation of Smith as a retributive theorist of punishment is challenged in favour of a view of his work as containing a curious amalgam of retributive and utilitarian elements. This unsynthesised theoretical compound accounts for many of the contradictory positions assumed by him, examples of which are given in the article. At the level of “punishment” (i.e., punishment considered without a political dimension), the retributivehtilitarian dichotomy is observed in his discussions of merit and demerit (which are utilitarian in their logic) and propriety and impropriety (which are retributive). At the level of state punishment, the same dichotomy is seen in his juxtaposition of considerations of individual justice and the political ends of punishment. A final section locates Smith's “double cleft stick” theoretically in his position on the one hand in the Hobbesian materialist tradition and on the other in his historical stance half-way between the individualism of the contractarians and the full blown utilitarianism of Bentham. 相似文献
8.
The juvenile justice system has undergone radical change in the past three decades. The procedural revolution that began at the end of the 1960s with the Gault decision has more recently evolved into a substantive revolution. The changes in juvenile justice have been many and in some instances drastic, particularly in the apparent demise of the rehabilitative ideal. New theories or models have emerged, incorporating terminology such as punishment, justice, and accountability into the vocabulary of juvenile justice practitioners and the lexicon of state juvenile codes. The transformation in the philosophy and underlying goals of the system has been well-documented over the past decade or so. It is now time to ask critical questions about the significance and meaning of this transformation and to bring attention to unresolved issues. This article suggests the issues that need to be addressed in order to make both practical and philosophical sense out of the changes in the mission of “juvenile justice.” 相似文献
9.
Harold Tanner 《Law & social inquiry》1995,20(1):277-303
10.
Theoretical Unification in Justice and Beyond 总被引:1,自引:1,他引:0
Guillermina Jasso 《Social Justice Research》2007,20(3):336-371
The goal of scientific work is to understand more and more by less and less. In this effort, theoretical unification plays
a large part. There are two main types of theoretical unification—unification of different theories of the same field of phenomena
and unification of theories of different fields of phenomena. Both types are usually a surprise; even when vigorously pursued,
their form, when they finally appear, may differ radically from preconceptions. This paper examines a series of 21 unification
surprises in the study of justice and beyond, 16 in the study of justice and 5 in the unification of 3 fundamental sociobehavioral
forces—justice, status, and power—and the subsequent unification of the three sociobehavioral forces with identity and with
happiness.
相似文献
Guillermina JassoEmail: |
11.
12.
Who is more likely to forgive, given that justice is important and motivating for people? In this article, we argue that the relation between justice and forgiveness depends on the type of justice involved; specifically, the goals of justice, i.e. retributive versus inclusive. We also explored the influence of motivational values on justice goals and forgiveness. Using data from 178 undergraduate psychology students who responded to measures of retributive and inclusive justice attitudes, forgiveness attitudes and dispositions, and values, we found support for our hypotheses that retributive justice goals are negatively related to forgiving attitudes and dispositions; inclusive justice goals are positively related to forgiveness; and benevolence and power values play the dominant role in predicting forgiveness. The results have implications for how the relation between justice and forgiveness is conceptualised and applied. 相似文献
13.
Empirical studies corroborate a relatively close relation between goals of sentencing and punitiveness. However, it is not clear what aspects of sentencing goals motivate harsh punishment. This study analyzes the structure of sentencing goals and scrutinizes in particular whether the idea of retribution is associated with punitiveness, or whether punishment considerations from a societal perspective (macrolevel) are the source of more punitive responses. A questionnaire was mailed to a random sample drawn in Bern, Switzerland. A total of 357 persons responded to items measuring constructs including goals of sentencing, punitiveness, target of justice considerations, and perceived threat to society, after reading one of three short stories about specific crimes (fraud, physical injury, assault). Results of this study reveal a two-dimensional structure of sentencing goals. One dimension represents readiness to punish and exclude the offender socially. The other dimension refers to concerns of the victim versus the needs of the society as a whole. The analysis provides a new interpretation of sentencing goals. 相似文献
14.
Barbara A. Hudson 《Crime, Law and Social Change》1994,22(1):59-78
Within six months of implementation, the Criminal Justice Act 1991, which had been hailed as the most important piece of criminal justice legislation in England and Wales for many years, was already being undermined in practice, and a new Act, which amends or even reverses some of its more progressive principles, was brought before Parliament. This paper looks at some problems of proportionality in practice — through discussion of penological principles, and through consideration of the kinds of cases which are most difficult for a desert approach. Alternative ideas are examined to see whether they could offer any better framework for penal policy and practice. A mixed theory is advocated, with parsimony as its most important principle.I am grateful to Nicola Lacey, Mike Levi, Mike Maguire and Andrew Von Hirsch for comments on the first draft of this paper. 相似文献
15.
Previous research considering reactions to injustice has focused predominantly on retributive (i.e., punitive) responses.
Restorative justice, a relatively understudied concept, suggests an alternative justice response which emphasizes bilateral discussion in an
attempt to reach a consensus about the meaning of the offense and how to address the transgression. The current research explores
the additional contribution of restorative justice processes, examining the extent to which bilateral consensus is viewed
as a fairer response to transgressions than unilateral decisions. Results show that, independent of the punishment, restorative responses
are generally regarded as fairer than nonrestorative responses. And compared to punishment, which tends to be moderated by
offender intent and seriousness of the harm, restorative responses are regarded as particularly fair when the involved parties
share an identity. Findings suggest the importance of distinguishing retributive justice from a “restorative notion of justice”—a
notion that focuses on addressing concerns over the maintenance of existing social relationships and identity-defining values.
相似文献
Tyler G. OkimotoEmail: |
16.
Jonathan W. Caudill Brie Diamond Chad R. Trulson Matt DeLisi James W. Marquart 《American Journal of Criminal Justice》2012,37(3):306-320
National estimates have suggested that less than one-in-five arsons are cleared by arrest. Interestingly, juveniles account for nearly 50% of arson arrests, a proportion greater than all other non-status offenses. While the criminological literature on juvenile arson has been fairly consistent, a dearth of applied criminological literature has observed how the juvenile justice system responds to arsonists. Drawing on data on more than 5,000 juveniles from a large southern state, this study was able to differentiate between the system responses for arsonists and other felons. The findings suggested that the juvenile justice system distinguished between arsonists and other felons in some respects, but these distinctions failed to align with the suggested approaches of the criminological literature. 相似文献
17.
解读包公故事中的罪与罚 总被引:1,自引:0,他引:1
包公听讼断狱故事 ,突出的也是“罪与罚”的价值取向。正是基于这一原因 ,本稿在讨论包公故事中的法律问题时 ,首先标举“罪与罚”这个题目。除此之外 ,这一安排也有先“实体法”后“程序法”的技术考虑。值得引起我们思考的是 :在现实社会生活中 ,纠纷无论如何不会出现民事纠纷与刑事犯罪之间比例如此“悬殊”的情形。那末 ,何以馀以故事特别强调“罪与罚”这一主题呢 ?这正是本文着重研究的 相似文献
18.
从程序正义到摆平“正义”:法官的多重角色分析 总被引:1,自引:0,他引:1
法院如何建构其主体性?是当下中国社会面临的时代之问。在规则之治、程序正义的逻辑下展开运作的司法因其制度刚性有余而操作柔性不足,难以有效回应中国社会仍停留在传统的具体情境,从而遭到实用主义的解构。但是,在调审合一制度路径下游刃有余的实用主义司法哲学实际上亦并不足以构成对法院主体性的命题支撑,甚至可能是更加错误的道路。作为法院主体性的命题表达,能够体现法院明确的司法功能并与其他权力部门相区分的主体特质始终只在于独立的审判。 相似文献
19.
Peter H. Solomon Jr. 《Law & society review》2004,38(3):549-582
This article assesses the power of judges in Russia (on courts of general jurisdiction, arbitrazh courts, and military courts) in dealing with cases in which the government or one of its officials is a party. Power, that is, the resources of judges to make binding decisions, is understood as including jurisdiction, discretion, and authority to ensure compliance. The article analyzes the dramatic growth of jurisdiction and caseload in administrative justice in post-Soviet Russia to the year 2002 and examines how the courts have performed in handling the review of actions by officials (including in the military), tax cases, electoral disputes, and the legality of normative acts (both regulations and laws of lower governments), especially in the late 1990s. High rates of success for persons bringing suits against the government suggest that judges were able by and large to adjudicate fairly and rule against the state. To a considerable degree (but not always), those decisions were implemented (more often than were constitutional and commercial decisions). Interestingly, citizens who challenged the actions of officials in court had much more success than those who brought complaints to the Procuracy. Finally, the article develops an agenda for future research that would deepen understanding of the significance of administrative justice in the Russian Federation and the power of judges. 相似文献