Punishment Vs Retributive Justice

As a parent of two, I sometimes have to be the bad guy and punish my kids. I would be an irresponsible parent if I would just allow them to do what they wanted when they wanted. As the dad, I have to set rules and stand by them. I sometimes have to adjust my rules a little bit, but for the most part, most of my rules will stay the same. When you do not follow the regulations, punishments are to follow. Some penalties are more severe than others. Therefore, the penalties are more severe. There are even times where I punish my older son to send a message to my younger son. He is a little younger and has to be reminded of the rules in place even for him. The situations that I battle with in my household are situations that are faced by communities
The purposes for punishments falls under two prongs, retributive justice, and utilitarian justice. Retributive justice relates to “punishment is justified because people deserve it.”(Acker & Brody, 2010, p. 7) Utilitarian Justice believes in the purpose punishment serves.
Retributive justice is when you violate the rights of another; then you should be penalized. These punishments restore order in the community. When offenders not getting punished, then there is an unbalance in society and guilt is now placed on the policy makers. Retributive justice becomes an issue when the individual committing the offenses is a victim as well. This person has been affected by outside entities, therefore lacks moral fiber, and will not endanger the rest of the community. Utilitarian justification has been the model for the American justice system for the most of the twentieth century. It utilizes different strategies for punishment, one being general deterrence. The knowledge of the penalty to follow the crime will reduce the violations. Individuals observed the consequences through another offender, who has committed a violation of rules and therefore are not interested in criminal