Criminal Law and Philosophy 12 (3):411-426 (2018)

Authors
Abstract
It is easy to understand the apparent appeal of strict liability to policymakers and legal reformers seeking to reduce crime: if the criminal law can do away with its traditional culpability requirement, it can increase the likelihood of conviction and punishment of those who engage in prohibited conduct or bring about prohibited harm or evil. And such an increase in punishment rate can enhance the crime-control effectiveness of a system built upon general deterrence or incapacitation of the dangerous. Similar arguments support the use of criminal liability for regulatory offenses. Greater punishment rates suggest greater compliance. But this analysis fails to appreciate the crime-control costs of strict liability. By explicitly providing for punishment in the absence of moral blameworthiness, the law undermines its moral credibility with the community and thereby provokes subversion and resistance instead of the cooperation and acquiescence it needs for effective crime control. More importantly, the system’s lost moral credibility undermines the law’s ability to harness the powerful forces of stigmatization, social influence, and internalized norms. Given the serious limitations inherent in the real-world application of general deterrence and preventive detention programs, the most effective crime-control strategy is to build the criminal law’s reputation for being just, which means avoiding the use of strict liability.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
ISBN(s)
DOI 10.1007/s11572-017-9435-8
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 64,178
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Is There a Case for Strict Liability?Larry Alexander - 2018 - Criminal Law and Philosophy 12 (3):531-538.
What is a Crime?Grant Lamond - 2007 - Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 27 (4):609-632.
Legal and Moral Responsibility.Antony Duff - 2009 - Philosophy Compass 4 (6):978-986.
Appraising Strict Liability.Andrew Simester (ed.) - 2005 - Oxford University Press.
Does Fault Matter?Vera Bergelson - 2018 - Criminal Law and Philosophy 12 (3):375-392.
Action, the Act Requirement and Criminal Liability.Antony Duff - 2004 - Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement 55:69-103.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2017-08-13

Total views
5 ( #1,177,676 of 2,454,913 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #449,233 of 2,454,913 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes