Explain Beccaria’s view on crime and punishment.

Question

What will be an ideal response?

Answer 1

Beccaria argued that punishments should be proportionate to the harm done, should be identical for identical crimes, and should be applied without reference to the social status of either offender or victim. Beccaria made no effort to plumb the depths of criminal character or motivation, arguing that crime is simply the result of “the despotic spirit which is in every man” (1963, p. 12). He also argued that tendency of “man” to give in to the “despotic spirit” had to be countered by the threat of punishment, which had to be certain, swift, and severe enough to outweigh any benefits offenders get from crime if they are to be deterred from future crime. He elaborated on these three elements of punishment as follows: Certainty: “The certainty of punishment, even if it be moderate, will always make a stronger impression that the fear of another which is more terrible but combined with the hope of impunity” (1963, p. 58). Swiftness: “The more promptly and the more closely punishment follows upon the commission of a crime, the more just and useful will it be” (1963, p. 55). Severity: “For a punishment to attain its end, the evil which it inflicts has only to exceed the advantage derivable from the crime; in this excess of evil one should include the . . . loss of the good which the crime might have produced. All beyond this is superfluous and for that reason tyrannical” (1963, p. 43). Beccaria makes clear that punishments must outweigh any benefits offenders get from crime if they are to be deterred from future crime. But such punishment should be as certain and as swift as possible if it is to have a lasting impression on the criminal and to deter others.