Sign up to access the complete lesson and track your progress!
Unlock This CoursePrison is not the only way to punish. Many offenders never go to prison. Some are punished in their own community, some pay money, and some are sent away or shut out by other people, and some are punished by people who have no legal power at all. This lesson looks at how effective these other punishments are. To judge them, use the aims you already know: protection of citizens, deterrence, retribution, incapacitation and rehabilitation.
Key terms:
With a community sentence, the offender is punished but stays free. A court may order unpaid work, such as cleaning up a park or repainting a public building. Other non-custodial sentences control where the offender can go, or who they can contact:
The offender keeps their job, home and family ties, so rehabilitation is more likely. Unpaid work repays the community. These sentences are cheaper than prison and avoid mixing with other offenders. Tags and curfews give some protection of citizens.
Some people see them as too soft, so they may not satisfy retribution. An offender can break the rules, remove a tag or ignore an order, and officials cannot watch everyone all the time. They do little incapacitation, because the offender is still free to offend.
Probation can be given instead of prison or after someone leaves prison. The probation officer checks on the offender, may help them find work or housing, and can send them back to court if they break the rules.
A financial penalty such as a fine is quick and cheap to give. It can deter, because people do not want to lose money, and the money can go to the state. It is used for less serious crimes, like some driving offences.
Cheap for the state, easy to give and the offender is not taken away from work or family. The punishment is clear and fits minor offences.
A fine hurts a poor person much more than a rich one, so it may be unfair. A rich offender or a large company may just pay and carry on. It does not rehabilitate or incapacitate.
A police caution is used for minor offences when the person admits what they did. It avoids the cost of a court and does not give a young first-time offender a long punishment. It may work as individual deterrence for a first offence. However, it may be seen as no real punishment, so it may not deter someone who has already offended before, and it may not deal with the cause of the offending.
Exile removes the offender from the community. It may be ordered by a ruler, a court or the community itself. It can act as incapacitation for that community and as retribution, and the threat of it may deter others. In small societies with strong shared values, being sent away can be a heavy punishment. It is less effective in modern societies because the offender may simply commit crime somewhere else, so the problem is moved, not solved. It also does not rehabilitate.
Remember from the lesson on informal social control that ostracism means being shut out by a group. It can be very effective in a close-knit community where people depend on each other, as the fear of being shut out keeps many people in line. In big, anonymous societies it is weak, because a person can easily find another group.
Today, people can punish others without any court. On social media, a post about an offender can be shared very quickly, and the offender may be shamed, insulted or lose their job. This can feel like retribution to the people who join in, and it may deter others who fear being exposed.
A vigilante group goes further and takes action itself, for example when people believe the police are not doing enough about crime in their area.
There is no fair trial, no evidence is checked and there is no limit on the punishment. The wrong person may be accused. The punishment can be much worse than the crime, and it can lead to violence. Vigilantes may break the law themselves. Supporters say it shows the community cares and may protect people where formal control is weak, but it is generally seen as an unreliable and unfair form of social control.
Question: How effective is electronic tagging with a curfew?
Point: It is fairly effective at keeping offenders under control without prison.
Explain: Officials can check that the person is at home at night, so some offending is prevented and the offender keeps their job and family.
Limit: The offender can still offend in the daytime, so it gives less protection than prison.
Saying a punishment "works" or "does not work" without saying which aim you mean. Writing that community sentences are "easy" with no explanation. Forgetting that ostracism, social media shaming and vigilante action are not given by the courts. Using a statistic you are not sure of: describe what happens in words instead.
(a) Define the term probation. [2 marks]
(b) Give two examples of non-custodial sentences. [2 marks]
(c) Explain three reasons why a fine may be an ineffective punishment. [6 marks]
(a) Probation is a period when an offender lives in the community (1) but is supervised by a probation officer and must follow rules (1).
(b) Any two: electronic tagging (1), curfew (1), restraining order (1), community service or unpaid work (1).
(c) Any three explained: A fine hurts a poor person more than a rich one (1), so it is unfair (1). A rich person or a large company can easily pay it (1), so it may not deter them from offending again (1). A fine does not deal with the causes of crime, such as addiction or having no job (1), so it does not rehabilitate the offender (1). A fine does not stop the offender from committing crime again (1), so it gives little protection of citizens (1).
For "explain three reasons", write three separate reasons and give each one its own "so" or "because". Do not repeat the same point three times.