Hannah Arendt Quotes

Crimes are more effectually prevented by the certainty than the severity of punishment.

Severity of punishment is not the cure for crime. Certainty and promptness of punishment rather than severity are more effective. There was a time, as we all know, when in England considerably more than two hundred separate offenses were punishable by death. Nevertheless, that period was one of the most lawless and violent known to history. The utter failure of the drastic technique in the suppression of crime is universally acknowledged.

Nothing will deter crime but the certainty of punishment.

Criminals are punished, that others may be deterred.

Punishment can do a lot for criminals, and send a message to the rest of society.

Punishment is the last and the least effective instrument in the hands of the legislator for the prevention of crime.

The purpose of punishment is fulfilled, crime is repressed by penalties of just, not tormenting, severity, its repetition is prevented, and hope is given for the reformation of the criminal.

But passing by all other considerations, and contemplating merely the political institutions of the United States, I lament that we waste so much time and money in punishing crimes and take so little pains to prevent them.

I think one of the keys to any crime-prevention program that's got to be developed is to focus on punishment - to let people know that there is a sanction and a punishment for hurting others.

No severity of punishment deters when detection is uncertain, as it always must be.

You will feel the full force of the law and if you are old enough to commit these crimes you are old enough to face the punishments. And to these people I would say this: you are not only wrecking the lives of others, you are potentially wrecking your own life too.

The act of policing is, in order to punish less often, to punish more severely.

Of course it can be said of jails, too, that they try - by punishing the troublesome - to deter others. No doubt, in certain instances this deterrence actually works. But generally speaking it fails conspicuously.

A far greater factor than abolishing poverty is the deterrent effect of swift and certain consequences: swift arrest, prompt trial, certain penalty and - at some point - finality of judgment.

More prisons, more enforcement, effective death penalty.

It is better to prevent crimes than to punish them.

Arresting people is not going to lower the crime rate

The key for members of the public is that they want criminals to be punished. They want them taken off the streets. They also want criminals who come out of prison to go straight.

Simply put, violent criminals break the law - any law - every day with impunity.

Gang members aren't frightened into acceptable behavior by increased penalties, enhanced punishments, and the promise of new detention facilities.

Given the devastation that crime can visit on families and communities, I will err on being a little too tough on crime than being too soft on crime.

The truth is you cannot decrease the severity and certainty of sentences without increasing crime. It's simply impossible.

There is one stark fact facing us: three quarters of all crime that results in a caution or sentence happens because of reoffending. We must be fearless in dealing with this.

Crime is naught but misdirected energy.

It doesn't help to wait until something happens and then prosecute the offenders, especially if it's the idea of the offender to extinguish himself in the commission of the crime.