Homework on Punishment and the Robinson & Darley Reading

The answers to all of these questions must be in your own words (and this does not mean that you took sentences from the reading and replaced words with synonyms).

1. According to Robinson & Darley in the reading, does the possibility of legal punishment deter criminal behavior at all (yes or no)? What, according to them, does not deter criminal behavior in general (explain in your own words)? (2pts)

2. Robinson & Darley say that deterrence requires that people know about a punishment; they also argue that we should not think that people do know about punishments in general.
a. Give one piece of evidence that they cite to support the claim that people do not know about punishments. (1 pt)
b. Does the evidence you just gave show that people do not know that the act in question is punishable at all? If not, what does it show? (1 pt)

3. Robinson & Darley also argue that deterrence requires that people be able to properly use their knowledge about punishment to make decisions. Give one piece of evidence that they cite that suggests that criminals often cannot do so. (2pts)

4. Robinson & Darley think that there is a third prerequisite for deterrence (beyond the two asked about in questions 2 and 3).
a. Explain that third prerequisite in your own words (1 pt)
b. Give one piece of evidence from the reading that that prerequisite is often not met (1 pt)

5. Consider a person who believed that the only moral justification for punishment (the only thing that makes punishment morally acceptable/right) is that it deters some sort of bad behavior, and who accepted everything Robinson & Darley say in their paper. What would such a person think a morally acceptable criminal justice system look like? (2pts)