Retaliation is when a victim or someone who perceives themselves as such seeks justice by hurting,defrauding or stealing from property of the victimizer.Fellow drug dealers including customers,rivals,suppliers or competing sellers are likely to retaliate against dealers.Restrictive deterrence occurs when a seller restricts sales to avoid retaliation
Fear associated with another crime, namely drug use, indirectly deterred selling. To fully determine the relationship between sanctions, fear, and crime, it is necessary to study such indirect effects.
This is because the commission of some offenses flows from the commission of others. For instance, the more often people are victimized, the more opportunities there are to retaliate; less victimization, then, leads to less retaliation (Jacques, 2010; Jacobs & Wright, 2006).
While some indirect criminogenic effects are logical, such as the link between predation and retaliation, others are more theoretical, as is the one we now describe according to a study published in the journal of medicine.
Restrictive deterrence is the process whereby offenders limit the frequency, magnitude, or seriousness of their offenses to avoid pain according to the study .
Prior research on drug dealing and restrictive deterrence largely focuses on the effect of formal control, or political sanction.
Bentham, however, suggests there are four other types of sanction that may deter offenses: moral, sympathetic, religious, and physical. This paper explores whether and how each sanction type restricts drug sales among a sample of 29 young, suburban, middle-class drug sellers.
The study concludes by examining the usefulness of studying interconnections between the sanctions and by outlining the reasons to choose Bentham’s sanction typology in future work.
http://jod.sagepub.com/content/44/2/212
No comments:
Post a Comment