"Perhaps the most significant improvement in the field of corrections over the last several decades has been the advancement and routinization of risk and risk–need assessment instruments within justice agencies (Andrews, Bonta, and Wormith, 2006; Bonta, 2002). Actuarial risk-prediction instruments can tell us which offenders are most likely to reoffend as well as whom among the offender population we might want to target for more intensive rehabilitative programming.1 Adhering to the risk principle by targeting higher risk offenders and matching the intensity of controls and services to risk levels has been found to improve the effectiveness of correctional interventions (Andrews and Bonta, 2010; Dowden and Andrews, 1999a, 1999b; Landenberger and Lipsey, 2005; Lowenkamp and Latessa, 2005; Lowenkamp, Latessa, and Holsinger, 2006)."
Why Was Judicial Corporal Punishment Abolished?
Why Was Judicial Corporal Punishment Abolished? by John Dewar Gleissner, Esq. Throughout history, the lowest ranks of society provided the majority of criminals. Punishments often varied by social class or caste, officially or unofficially, and JCP most often was reserved for or primarily given to slaves and those with little status, money or property. [1] Thus, JCP is generally abolished in advanced societies as a by-product of greater equality or democracy, because it is a relic of lower-class status that newly enfranchised citizens dislike. JCP is unpleasant to administer, sometimes causes publicized deaths, [2] seems barbaric when incarceration holds out false promises of rehabilitation or humane treat...