Arguments for Sanctions: Deterrence and Rehabilitation

This essay delves into the multifaceted arguments supporting the use of sanctions within the UK legal framework, focusing on incapacitation, fines, deterrence, and rehabilitation. It examines how these methods aim to reduce crime rates and address social issues, referencing deterrence and labeling theories. The essay explores the practical application of sanctions, including export controls, financial restrictions, and travel bans, and their effectiveness in achieving security objectives and upholding foreign policy. It analyzes the impact of incapacitation on high-risk criminals and its ethical considerations, the use of fines as a common form of punishment, the role of deterrence in shaping behavior, and the importance of rehabilitation in fostering personal growth and societal reintegration. The essay highlights the significance of these sanctions in creating a safer society and promoting ethical and moral obligations within the legal system.

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.

SANCTIONS 4
Incapacitation is therefore effective since it is implied based on the risks that an
individual is likely to cause to the society (GARMAN, 2017). This includes punishing a person
for a hypothetical offense. This implies that an individual is subjected to punishment, not for the
offense committed, but for the offence he or she is likely to commit or that which is assumed that
the individual will commit. Incapacitation therefore helps in correcting the young offenders since
they outgrow the criminal activities due to the long sentences, thus, incapacitation is quite
effective as it involves ethical and moral obligations.
Fines
Fines form the most widely applied form of sanction. Fines are imposed on individuals
for having committed criminal acts. Fines are imposed through the sentencing judge after an
individual has been convicted for a crime (Goncalves & Mello, 2017). In most cases, fines are
applied as form of probation and also to prevent prison sentences. The fines will then cover for
the probation time and the time an individual is supposed to be behind bars. Several factors may
prompt the decision of a sentencing judge to levy a criminal fine. This include the sternness of
the crime committed, the type of crime that the offender committed and various circumstances
that surrounds the crime.
A defendant can commit crime due to stress or under the influence of drugs. Fines are
also imposed in consideration to the history of the defendant, measures that a particular
defendant has adopted to prevent the criminal acts and the testimony issued by the offender’s
closer family members (Feeley, 2017). In addition, a fine may or may not be imposed in cases
where the criminal statutes have the least sentencing requirements. A fine can be applied if an
attorney negotiates with the prosecutions to save the case without going for trial. In this scenario,
the case will involve reducing charges against the offender and a fine will be imposed without

SANCTIONS 5
subjecting the offender to serve a particular prison period. Fines will therefore be effective as
forms of sanctions to reduce re-offending.
Deterrence
In this form of punishment, the offender is deterred from doing a certain thing that would
strengthen their criminal believes of the certainty of being found. In as much as Kant’s moral
principles critics deference, in which it holds that “a man should always be treated as an end in
himself, not only as a means for some other end”. Deterrence form of punishment is quiet
effective. This is because, deterrence is issued as a punishment to regulate human behaviors in
which a defender will suffer not only for the offence committed, but for the certainty of other
individuals to do the same criminal act (Paternoster, 2018). The person will have to suffer from
the offence as prescribed by the councils. Deterrence is moral in the sense that the penalties that
inflict various forms of suffering to the offenders such as humiliation, and degradation among
others, will contribute to less or no re-offending cases.
Rehabilitation
As a method of punishment that has long been applied since the mid-1970s, rehabilitation
encourages prisoners and other offenders to acquire skills that assist them become people of
certain occupation and makes them able to resolve challenges to psychological problems that
they encounter in life. For instance, after undergoing a complete rehabilitation program, an
individual will solve aggression challenges and the substance abuse challenges among others.
This might therefore make an individual to be accepted back to the community.

SANCTIONS 6
With several cases of prisoners being drug abusers as well as aggressive nature of their
lives, rehabilitation has played an important part in the lives of inmates. Rehabilitation approach
often regard punishment as its prime function and creates an increased approach in the life of
prisoners, making them to abort their criminal acts to become better people in the society
(Hudson, 2016). Rehabilitation also assist prisoners with mental problems since for many
decades, the mentally ill individuals have been ignored. Through the realization of the prison
systems, the rehabilitative aspect was introduced in prisons and others have been subjected by
courts of thus enabling individuals receive mental care that is necessary for their improvement.
In addition, prisoners without serious mental problems also acquire rehabilitative program. This
assist such individuals to be received back to the society once they complete their jail terms.
Ethical, rehabilitation supports an individual’s moral obligations and assist one to see the
other aspect of life, the meaning of living without depending on drugs and being morally upright
(Chaudhuri, 2017). It allows individuals to enjoy the better part that allows them to develop
socially and have their behaviors shaped to the desired behaviors by the law. The prison policies
have undergone improvement due to the contributions of the rehabilitation programs. Therefore,
rehabilitation is ideologically the most valuable method of justifying punishment. It has a
humanizing perceptions and the ideal behavior that individuals acquire after the process
contributes to the sociological development and help them to have restrained behaviors towards
crimes and related offences.
Rehabilitation will also recognize the equity of social inequality on an individual’s life
and the idea to admit that certain behavior is not worth in once life. Finally, rehabilitation will
allow an individual to admit that a circumstance is worth rejection irrespective of one’s position
in the society. Instead, an individual will exercise much freedom acquired after making a

SANCTIONS 7
decision to live through the guidance of moral obligations and not committing crimes. Moreover,
rehabilitation will assist the judges in making decisions with the aim of providing flexible and
directions that makes sense to the offenders. Through this, the offender will be allowed to learn
from the mistakes and offences committed earlier and change towards becoming the best
personalities that the society admirers. Rehabilitation will offer offenders sentences that will
allow them to reform and make viable decisions. Hence, sanctions are ideal for the society to
become a better place that individuals live in. Therefore, the sanctions should always be adopted
when solving most cases in our societies.

SANCTIONS 8
Reference List
Adler, M., (2016). A new Leviathan: Benefit sanctions in the twenty-first century. Journal of
Law and Society [online] , 43(2), pp. 195-227.
Bernburg, J. G., (2019). Labeling theory. In: s.l.:Springer, pp. 179-196. Acessed from 24 March
2020.
Chaudhuri, T., (2017). Megan's Law and Durkheim’s Perspective of Punishment: Retribution,
Rehabilitation or Both?. Journal of Arts and Humanities [online], 6(7), pp. 62-73. Acessed from:
https://www.theartsjournal.org/index.php/site/article/view/1235. [Available from: 23 March
2020].
Drew, J. M. & others, (2017). Policing, deterrence and incapacitation. Understanding Crime
Prevention: The Case Study Approach, p. 13. Available from: 24 March 2020.
Feeley, M., (2017). The process is the punishment. In: Crime, Law and Society [online].
s.l.:Routledge, pp. 139-188. Available from:
https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/e/9781315095288/chapters/10.4324/9781315095288-8
[Acessed from 23 March 2020].
GARMAN, J. a. B. P. K., (2017). Incapacitation and Sentencing. In: Routledge Handbook of
Corrections in the United States [onine] . s.l.:Routledge, pp. 46-59. Avaiable from:
https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/9781315645179/chapters/10.4324%2F9781315645179-10
[Acessed from 24 March 2020].
Goncalves, F. & Mello, S., (2017). Does the punishment fit the crime? speeding fines and
recidivism. Speeding Fines and Recidivism[online] . Available from:
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Delivery.cfm?abstractid=3064406 [ Acessed from October 27, 201].

SANCTIONS 9
Hesselmann, F., (2019). Punishing crimes of the mind: Sanctions for scientific misconduct as a
case for the cultural theory of punishment. Theoretical Criminology [online], 23(4). Available
from: .[Accessed from 23 March 2020].
Hudson, B., (2016). Justice Through Punishment?: Critique of the Justice Model of Criminal
Conventions[online]. In: s.l.:Macmillan International Higher Education. Available from:
https://books.google.co.ke/books?
hl=en&lr=&id=FkRdDwAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PR8&dq=rehabilitation+punishment&ots=O3H
DEvsKhq&sig=f_qXRgnqRqtzteK2ocYG5o8utmQ&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=rehabilitation
%20punishment&f=false [Accessed from 23 march 2020]
Paternoster, R., (2018). A review of prior tests of labeling theory. In: Deterrence, Choice, and
Crime [online], Volume 23. s.l.:Routledge, pp. 81-106. Accessed from:
https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/e/9781351112710/chapters/10.4324/9781351112710-3
Paternoster, R., (2018). Perceptual deterrence theory. In: Deterrence, Choice, and
Crime[online], Volume 23. s.l.:Routledge, pp. 81-106. Available from: 24 March 2020.
Pereboom, D., (2016). Incapacitation, reintegration, and limited general deterrence. Neuroethics,
pp. 1-11. [Accessed from 23 March 2020].