>> I don't have a problem with it. I think you are forgetting the deterrent effect
>> on others as well. If the general lowlife thought a decent fraud meant no bird,
>> they'd all be at it.
Yes, there is always going to be a risk/reward calculation going on. I suppose it depends on the alternative punishments.
If you were talking about a massive fraud then prison might need to be the consequence because the potential reward is so high.
The deterrent effect is important, no doubt, but the key thing is handling it so that the convicted person can get back into society.
>> ...but on the other hand, the young mum who is struggling and who does not
>> commit crime. What does no punishment say to her?
I'm not advocating no punishment, just not a punishment which makes it extremely likely that the convicted person goes off on the wrong track for good.
The alternative to all of this is immediate massive jail sentences for even minor infractions, to create a huge risk vs any reward. But it has its own serious problems, not least that people make silly rash judgement, even in the face of massive risk.
But, what is perhaps more problematic is a system that too easily labels. Punish bad behaviour, but don't make it too hard for people to redeem themselves.
|
