October 23, 2012
Summary Response: The Prisoner’s Dilemma
By: Stephen Chapman
This reading was about the different ways of punishment that the law or culture would have for people broke laws and did crimes. It talked about some cruel punishments that the west would have like cutting off the hands of people that stole things, killing people that committed murders, and flogging the men or women for rape. These punishments would all be decided by the judge and how they chose their judge was that he has reached puberty, he is a believer, he knows that laws perfectly, he cannot be diagnose with amnesia and he cannot be a bastard or a female. This really shocked me because besides the small stuff like puberty, believing, not sick and not a women the only thing that they need to know is the laws. What is believing really? It basically means a persons’ opinion and what they chose to do. What if the judge keeps changing his beliefs? Puberty is a given because you would want a kid to be a judge but then again it said that he must reach puberty at that age he is just a young adult. So if he was to become judge and a believer most of the people that he puts away or gives cruel punishments would be his age or older than him. In the story it also talked about how American punishments were compared to the old western ways. For example going to jail for years to life or death penalties if crime is severe compared to losing a body part, getting lashes, banned from the city and being cut open and burning the insides as you die. In this reading it also talked about why there are prisons and how it should help people inside and outside. For example retribution, this means punishing the law breaker so he or she won’t seek revenge. Then there is specific deterrence which means discouraging the offender from future crimes. After that is general deterrence which means using the criminal as an example to stop others from turning to crimes. Prevention is when the criminal is in jail...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document