Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T00:19:11.639Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Collective Punishment: Criminological Assessment: A Reply to Lipnowski's “A Partial Rehabilitation of the Principle of Collective Punishment”

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 July 2014

Jean-Paul Brodeur
Affiliation:
Centre international de criminologie comparée, Université de Montréal

Extract

One of the former members of the U.S. Sentencing Commission was an economist who proposed the following reasoning during a conference on sentencing held in Ottawa in 1988. Since there was no doubt that doubling all fares for air travel would result, at least momentarily, in fewer customers using air transportation, it was presumed to follow at least as clearly that noticeably increasing the punishment for crime would result in fewer persons willing to engage in crime. What the economist had overlooked was that the probability that you would have to pay for your plane ticket at the increased rate is very high; actually, you cannot fly unless you have bought a ticket. In contrast, the probability that a criminal will be caught and suffer the consequences of his or her behavior is perceived to be rather low in the case of most criminals, and with regard to certain crimes, such as break and enter, is actually quite low. Hence, increasing criminal punishments will not deter criminals as automatically as raising the cost of air travel will deter potential customers.

Type
Exchanges/Débate
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Law and Society Association 1993

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. For a classic description, see Linhart, R., L'établi (Paris, Éditions de Minuit, 1978).Google Scholar

2. I wish to stress that this camel is not part of the father's original estate. It is the old man's own camel, which he offers out of generosity and then regains at the end, in a wonderful conclusion of the story. This point seems to have escaped the attention of Mr. Lipnowski in the final paragraph of his rejoinder to my own reply.