Deterrence Theory vs. Labelling Theory: The Case for Strong Sanctions

This essay examines the contrasting perspectives of deterrence theory and labelling theory in the context of criminal sanctions. It argues in favor of deterrence theory, positing that stronger sanctions are more effective in reducing crime compared to labelling, which may inadvertently reinforce criminal behavior. The essay presents evidence supporting deterrence, citing historical and contemporary examples where stricter punishments led to decreased crime rates and improved societal well-being. It also addresses counterarguments related to labelling theory, refuting claims that it offers a more rehabilitative approach. Ultimately, the essay concludes that prioritizing deterrence through robust sanctions is crucial for fostering safer and more developed communities. Desklib provides this essay and many more resources for students.

THE CASE FOR/AGAINST
STRONGER SANCTIONS

TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................1
MAIN BODY ..................................................................................................................................1
ESSAY.............................................................................................................................................1
Position........................................................................................................................................1
Reasons.......................................................................................................................................1
Evidence......................................................................................................................................2
Counterarguments.......................................................................................................................3
CONCLUSION................................................................................................................................4
REFERENCES................................................................................................................................5

INTRODUCTION
The essay explores the arguments of labelling and deterrence theory. It supports strong
evidence in agreeing with both of the positions (Tittle, 2018). Along with it, it collects,
generates, and evaluates the evidence while establishing the position of which side of the essay is
better and positive.
MAIN BODY
ESSAY
Position
The theory labelling explains that in what manner the behaviour and self-behaviour of the
individuals determined or is influenced by the terms which is used to classify or describe them.
The theory is associated with the concepts including stereotyping and fulfilling prophecy.
The idea behind deterrence theory is that is an inferior force which is used by the virtue
of power that is destructive and the force of weapons. This doctrine gained the prominence of
strategy of military which was used during the cold war. In terms of criminology the deterrence
theory tend to provide less strict crimes to people by keeping them in the jail and just creating
small punishments for them.
The author in the report is taking the side of deterrence theory. It is because as per the set
belief that labelling theory does not make criminals to stop their actions instead in most cases it
makes them continues their actions (Cullen and Pratt, 2016). Whereas the deterrence theory
tends to stop criminals from doing actions which have been done by them in the earlier times.
Reasons
The deterrence theory is one of the major theories allowing the law to make use of
punishments which are strong enough to create a change of impact in the society. Since the past
few years it has been seen as their were a lot of criminal activities were taking place in the world
only because there was less punishment. It allows people to feel that they can commit crime and
away with it easily. Also, it makes the society the worst place. It is important to have strict
punishments rather than just labelling the criminals with the kinds of punishments they had
performed. The usage of stronger actions is going to allow the society to be more positive and
having strict legal implications where it finds a better approach to deal with things.
Along with it, it can be seen as the labelling theory is ineffective because fewer sanctions
often makes the individuals more free when the feel like committing crime. It does not create any
1

strong sanctions which hinders their mentality from committing strict crimes (Farrington, 2017).
Countries such as Mexico, Cuba and Afghanistan have made when made use of fewer sanctions
and fewer legal implications, the people of the country suffered from a rise in crime and it also
made it face issues in achieving growth and development of the nation.
Countries such as USA and UK have implied the usage of deterrence theory because it
allows the individuals of the country which are committing crime to face strong sanctions. Also,
it reduced the crime in the countries.
Evidence
As per the views of Barrick (2017), the deterrence theory has been used since the world
war 2. The military generals in order to ensure better practices and discipline made use of
practice to reduce crime and other such activities. The approaches proved as one of the finest
ones in order to ensure reduce crime and build a system which is secure and effective. Along
with it, the actions allowed people to be less leaned towards crime and related practices.
Similarly, Farrington (2017), states that deterrence improves the society and its culture on
wider platforms. The practices of strict criminal punishments when adopted in countries such as
Ghana and Cuba, it helps the country to observe an immediate reduction in crime and crime
related activities. It also helped the community to be more safe and people were less scared and
free from reoccurring crime rates.
According to the views of Matsueda (2017), in societies where criminals were provided
with less punishment and practices involving less punishment. It made these societies suffer from
growth and development and its people were not able to work as per their complete potentials. It
is important that strict punishments are being provided to the criminals of the society. Crimes
such as rape and theft needs to have strict government policies surrounding them to ensure better
restrictions. Developing restrictions is going to allow the community to flourish with having
fewer crimes. Fewer crimes will ensure that the areas in which the people and large masses are
residing are safe and secure. Along with it, it will also ensure new developments within the
society.
As per the views of McCord (2017), it has been seen as the communities where
deterrence theory was followed in terms of putting strong sanction for the criminals. These
communities developed faster and ensured better growth and development within the society and
2

its people. Each and everyone working the society were more clear about their goals and ensured
individual development.
According to the study of McCord (2017), it is important for individuals to ensure growth
and development in the set environment where the community in residing. The criminals which
are living in these societies makes it difficult for the people to grow and make it possible to earn
a safe living. Strict punishments to the individuals often makes the society feel less vulnerable to
the crime and the people which are living in the society. It helps them to safely work as they
want and live a society which is less scared of the crimes. Without strict punishment practices it
is not possible for the community to thrive and create an environment that can ensure their
growth and development.
Similarly, Sherman (2017) states that in the new world where technology has advanced
and has made it easy for the people to commit crimes. This has provided criminals with
opportunities to commit crimes without gaining much attention and the police team faces
difficulties to catch these criminals. These criminals need to be provided with strict sanctions and
strict punishment practices ensuring growth and development in the society and ensure that no
wrong use of technology is being made.
Counterarguments
According to the views of Kennedy (2017), the labelling theory often creates situations
where criminals are provided with the right punishment and they do not commit the same crime
again. Also, it maintains the individuals' identity and does not provide a harm to them to achieve
better growth and development in the near future. Along with it, it also protects the individuals
residing in the society because they feel worried about the crimes and their punishments.
The author's argument is not strong because the people which are living the society needs
to be feel worried from the results of the crime. In will make them to not commit such crimes
and maintain strict discipline within the society. Along with it, it is going to ensure that the
criminals are also scared from committing such crimes within the society. If these criminals are
left alone without making them aware of the consequences of their actions, it will harm the
environment and lifestyle of the society and the people living into it. It is important to maintain
this effort within the society and apply strict sanctions to ensure better growth and development
of the individuals living into it.
3

As per the views of Kleiman (2017), the criminals committing crimes such as robbery
and theft needs to be provided with fewer punishments. Other crimes such as rape, murder needs
to have strict punishment so that criminals do not commit such crimes often. This will maintain
law and order in the society and the people will not be worried about the consequences of each
and every crime.
The author's argument supports the crimes such as robbery and theft. It is important that
the people living in the society are made aware of the consequences of committing not just rape
and murder but robbery and theft will face strict sanctions as well. It will help the individuals
living the society to work more freely and would not any situations where there is a chance of
any criminal incidents. Along with it, these efforts will help to create a community which is
crime free and will maintain a law and order that is strict and reasonable. The criminals will be
frightened from committing crimes in the society which will cause them consequences that will
be hard to dealt with. It is important for the society to have such sanctions which are strict in
order to create a safe environment for the people residing into it (Kennedy, Kleiman and Braga,
2017). Along with it, the community will be more safe and secure and the people can live a life
that is safe and growth-oriented. It will take away the fear from them of crime and will provide
them their basic right of freedom.
CONCLUSION
The above report explores the importance of labelling and deterrence theory. It also
explains in what manner the labelling theory and practices is used within the society to reduce
crimes and crime rate. The report provides a literature review exploring the factual substantiation
of the practices followed within working environment of the communities. Along with it, it
produces counterarguments which states and refutes the opposing arguments.
4

REFERENCES
Books and Journals
Barrick, K., 2017. A review of prior tests of labeling theory. In Labeling Theory (pp. 97-120).
Routledge.
Cullen, F. T. and Pratt, T. C., 2016. Toward a theory of police effects. Criminology & Pub.
Pol'y. 15. p.799.
Farrington, D. P., 2017. Conclusions about developmental and life-course theories. In Integrated
developmental and life-course theories of offending (pp. 257-266). Routledge.
Kennedy, D. M., Kleiman, M. A. and Braga, A. A., 2017. Beyond deterrence. Handbook of
Crime Prevention and Community Safety. p.157.
Matsueda, R. L., 2017. The natural history of labeling theory. In Labeling Theory (pp. 21-52).
Routledge.
McCord, J., 2017. Theory, pseudotheory, and metatheory. In Advances in criminological
theory (pp. 127-146). Routledge.
Sherman, L.W., 2017. Experiments in criminal sanctions: Labeling, defiance, and restorative
justice. In Labeling Theory(pp. 149-176). Routledge.
Tittle, C. R., 2018. Control balance: Toward a general theory of deviance. Routledge.
5