Justice Model of Criminal Conventions

SANCTIONS 1
ARGUMENTS FOR SANCTIONS
Students Name
Course
Professor’ Name
University
State
Date

SANCTIONS 2
Arguments for Sanctions
Introduction
The impact of the law on solving social issues is examined by the increase to public
safety and reduction of re-offending. According to deterrence theory, when an activity is
criminalized, it is aimed at minimizing individuals punished from engaging in that activities and
also stop the entire population from doing the very act (Paternoster, 2018). Whereas the
labeling theory holds that the criminal efforts aimed at reducing the level of crime in a society to
assist offenders i.e. rehabilitation programs move people closer to criminal acts because such
people are already labeled as those doing engaging in such offence (Bernburg, 2019). The
society therefore perceived such people according to the activity in which they are already
recognized with, making such people to accept such labels.
To meet various purpose, the U.K applies sanctions. The sanction measures are adhered
to by an individual in the U.K and companies too. These enables the government to meet security
objectives, prevent terrorism, support its foreign policies and maintain security and peace.
sanction imposed in the U.K include immigration, trade sanctions such as dual-use items and
even financial sanctions covering the assets. This paper analyses arguments for stronger
sanctions in regards to deterrence and labelling theory.
The UK regulations are effective and its sanctions apply to any individual in the UK, and
citizen of the UK in whichever place they are located, corporate entities in the UK, and those that
are incorporated under the law in any part of the UK (Adler, 2016). The measures applied often
include export controls, named person’s experience travel bans, arms restrictions, freezing of
assets and financial sanctions on people and corporate entities as well as export controls and ban
on raw material imports (Hesselmann, 2019).

SANCTIONS 3
Incapacitation
Sanctions through incapacitation is applied in low-level crimes. This refers to exiling
offenders and keeping away from the community and eradicating their trading tools. This would
mean that offenders are isolated from the entire community. This process of incapacitation
reduces daily cases of offenses committed in the community. This also results in a decrease in
crime rates with a minimal percentage. In low incarceration systems, incapacitation would
contribute to the detention of high-risk criminals. Even though incapacitation does not correct
crimes committed by the offenders, it prevents a person from further reoffending the community.
Besides, the theory of moral reasoning holds that an act whose consequences benefit more
people is defensible (Pereboom, 2016).
An individual subjected to incapacitation will undergo the pain and suffering imposed on
him or her as it prevents further harm that the individual would have committed It to roam freely
in the society. In this situation, the rights of the person who has been subjected to incapacitation
would not be considered as long as incapacitation would have a significant influence on the
community. Incapacitation is primarily applied in the modern era with imprisonment used to by
physically removing offenders from the society (Drew & others, 2017). Besides, capital
punishment forms the permanent form of incapacitation. It is effective and undeniable in terms
of incapacitating obligation. Dismemberment is another form of permanent incapacitate
approach. This might involve the use of chemical castration for sex cases, while other forms of
incapacitation include restricting offenders from certain activities like being disqualified from
driving.