Clarifying Forfeiture Theory in Response to Dempsey and Lang

Criminal Law and Philosophy 14 (2):215-222 (2020)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This paper clarifies and defends my account of the rights forfeiture theory of punishment in response to analyses by Michelle Madden Dempsey and Gerald Lang.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,322

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Forfeiture and the Right to a Fair Trial.Gerald Lang - 2020 - Criminal Law and Philosophy 14 (2):203-213.
Rights Forfeiture and Punishment.Christopher Heath Wellman - 2016 - Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Provocateurs and Their Rights to Self-Defence.Lisa Hecht - 2019 - Criminal Law and Philosophy 13 (1):165-185.
Forfeiture Theory and Symmetrical Attackers.Stephen Kershnar - 2017 - Criminal Justice Ethics 36 (2):224-245.
Why Not Forfeiture?Gerald Lang - 2014 - In Helen Frowe and Gerald Lang (ed.), How We Fight: Ethics in War. Oxford University Press. pp. 38-61.
Rights Forfeiture Theorists Should Embrace the Duty View of Punishment.Ben Bryan - 2017 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 95 (2):317-327.

Analytics

Added to PP
2020-02-28

Downloads
33 (#468,569)

6 months
13 (#181,228)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Christopher Wellman
Washington University in St. Louis

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

A defense of abortion.Judith Jarvis Thomson - 1971 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 1 (1):47-66.
The suberogatory.Julia Driver - 1992 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 70 (3):286 – 295.
A defense of abortion.Judith Jarvis Thomson - 2009 - In Steven M. Cahn (ed.), Exploring ethics: an introductory anthology. New York: Oxford University Press.

Add more references