“Retributivist justice in an unjust society” by Odudu and Retribution, justice, and therapy: essays in the philosophy of law by Murphy explains the retributivist theories of punishment. Retribution refers to the punishment that is inflicted on an individual for misconduct. The retributive justice theory explains that the punishment should be proportionate to the misconduct committed. I agree with the arguments of retributive theory because people should not be allowed to benefit from disobedience, since it becomes unfair to the people who adhere to the law.
Retributive theory is something that one experiences in several instances in a day to day life. For a society to operate under a system of rules, individuals need to make sacrifices by adhering to the set rules and regulations. The sacrifices are normally for the greater advantage of society because people will avoid committing certain crimes. Nonetheless, the retributive theories of punishment argue that all crimes deserve to be punished, regardless of social utility considerations. I agree with what the author explains because if all [people are set free for the crimes they commit, the society would be overly unfair. For the system to remain just, it is essential to ensure that those who do not adhere to the set laws will not have an unfair advantage over those who adhere to the restrictions voluntarily. Therefore, criminal punishment aims to ensure there is a balance in the society between obedience and the benefit that one gets from it, and one does not benefit from disobedience.
Murphy (3) explains that individuals should not be allowed to benefit from their misconduct. To avoid this, society can use the retributive actions because if people do not benefit from their disobedience, it means the society is fair. For instance, if an individual steals from an individual to get wealth and is not arrested, he can live a lavish life, which is unfair to the people who toil hard to make money. Nonetheless, retributive theories are also in line with the utilitarian, who believes in increasing morality or good things in society and reducing the awful things. Nonetheless, the utilitarianism punishes people for wrongdoing to discourage them from doing the act again, whereas the retributive theories argue that people need to be punished because they deserve it. This notion makes some Utilitarian advocates perceive retributivism as unreasonable, primitive, and barbaric emotionalism. Furthermore, utilitarianism argues that there is no need for punishing people without any utility. Nonetheless, I disagree with this because it is not right to let people benefit from their wrongdoings. Additionally, there is a utility for society because punishment encourages people to adhere to the set laws and regulates because they do not want to get punished. For instance, although the people who advocate for utilitarian punishment perceive capital punishment, it is just for society when argued on the bases of retributive theory. Markedly, when individuals know that committing murder will result in the execution of their own lives, this will deter them from committing the crime. Moreover, if people argue that killing an individual does not have any utility to society and that people deserve to live, it can encourage other murderers. Thus, the retributive theories are not barbaric; rather, they are logical theories that can help a society be more just.
Nonetheless, in the current day society, it is not possible to revenge misconduct with another misconduct. For instance, one cannot steal from a thief to revenge for getting robbed. Instead, individuals get subjected to likeliness for the punishment, which sees not mean to be similar in all aspects. That explains why o is possible for the justice system to rank punishments differently, depending on how serious a crime is. For instance, if an individual steals a pet, they cannot face the same punishment as individuals who steal millions of dollars.
The texts relate to several aspects that I have read not only in this class but also in outside sources. For instance, a quote from newton’s law explains that there is an equal but opposite reaction for every action. Similarly, the Old Testament in the Bible explains that people commonly revenged a tooth for a tooth or an eye for an eye in the Old Testament. These examples show that several other aspects in life explain the need for people to know that every action has repercussions. Therefore, individuals should be cautious in anything that they do because it can either result in harm or good.
From my personal experience, while growing up, the main form of punishment was getting grounded, or deprived of the things I loved. Nonetheless, the intensity of the punishment depended on how dire the crime was. For instance, while I was in the sixth grade, I decided to skip school, which got me grounded for a week. Then, there was a time while we were playing in a nearby field that I intentionally pushed my younger brother off a tree, which made him fracture his hand, and I was grounded until his hand recovered. Notably, all these punishments made me avoid repeating such mistakes.
Markedly, if a society does not punish criminals in a manner that is proportionate to the type of crime they have committed, there is a risk of the society opting to revenge for the crime themselves. The society can decide to engage in lynch mobs, vigilante justice, or other private acts of retribution. Consequently, this can result in an anarchical and insecure state of justice. For instance, if the police in a given locality do not arrest a thief, some community members can opt for mob justice, resulting in the individual getting killed or hurt bloodily. However, getting arrested for a crime like stealing cannot result in one getting killed in person. Therefore, legal retribution is an effective strategy to safeguard society by ensuring an orderly application of punitive measures.
In conclusion, the retributive theory of punishment is an effective way of ensuring justice is met in society. The theory argues that any misconduct deserves to be punished, regardless of whether or not the victims or other society members desire it. Moreover, the theory conforms to the utilitarian guidelines because they both discourage people from getting involved in misconduct. Additionally, allowing an individual to benefit from misbehavior is unjust to the people who adhere to the law because they have deprived themselves of adhering to set guidelines. Therefore, societies should embrace this form of punishment because it helps promote justice in society.