Sentences with phrase «of general deterrence»

While I take David's point that the efficacy of general deterrence is always debatable, if we want to take a stand against a deterrence rationale for punishment, let us make it on a case where a man or woman is serving a prolonged jail sentence solely in the name of deterring others, not where a company has simply been driven into bankruptcy by a gross and tragic mistake.

The «public interest» includes «a consideration of the principle of general deterrence with attention being paid to the gravity of the offence, its incidence in the community, public attitudes towards it and public confidence in the effective enforcement of the criminal law.»

But nowhere did Parliament say that the doctrine of general deterrence is paramount in any specific class of offence.

The sentencing objectives reflected in the principles of general deterrence and denunciation, to the degree that they are community - directed, are far better met in this case by a sanction that rewards rehabilitation than one that perpetuates incarceration.»

«The majority decision failed to consider the importance of general deterrence in protecting the public,» Harte said.

Even if a custodial sentence was appropriate in this case, it is a well - established principle of sentencing laid down by this court that a first sentence of imprisonment should be as short as possible and tailored to the individual circumstances of the accused rather than solely for the purpose of general deterrence.

The Intervenor submits that, in sentencing persons convicted for aiding suicide under Section 241 (b) of the Criminal Code, the principle of general deterrence must be the overriding factor.

The efficacy of the sentencing principle of general deterrence (penalizing one as an example or warning to others) can be debated.

It is certainly understandable that the objective of general deterrence is «particularly applicable to public welfare offences where it is essential for the proper functioning of our society for citizens at large to expect that basic rules are established and enforced to protect the physical, economic and social welfare of the public.»

Hard - core drinking drivers are a problem, but it's a mistake to spend too many resources on programs that target them specifically, at the expense of general deterrence.

Not exact matches

At a more general level, the international system is returning to great power security competition, now that multipolarity is replacing the post-Cold War unipolar moment, and how that future will turn out is uncertain — but one thing that the last 67 years have shown is that nuclear deterrence is a fairly effective way of stopping major power security tension turning into all - out conventional war.

Previous research has indicated that the most effective method of combating drinking and driving is to use the general deterrence model.

3 In this particular case, the principles which need to be addressed are the overriding principle of protection of society and the factors that must be given weight are general deterrence, specific deterrence, denunciation and rehabilitation.

Accused went to cottage of JC with whom she previously cohabited — Accused found JC with victim, another lady, in sauna — Angry words were exchanged between accused and JC — Victim testified that accused pushed her following verbal exchange, as a result victim lost balance and ended up against stove, thereby sustaining serious burns to body — Trial judge accepted victim's evidence that there was some kind of pushing — Accused convicted on one count of assault causing bodily harm, and sentenced to two - year term of probation and $ 1,000.00 fine, accused was also ordered to provide DNA sample pursuant to s. 487.04 of Criminal Code — Accused appealed — Appeal against sentence was allowed — Trial judge erred in concluding that discharge was not appropriate in circumstances, especially given conclusion that accused did not deliberately attempt to injure victim — Trial judge found that there was no need for either specific deterrence or general deterrence; prime concern was need for denunciation of her conduct — Section 730 of Criminal Code permits discharge in cases of this nature, provided that it was in best interest of accused and not contrary to public interest — Accused was responsible individual with no record whatsoever, she held position as counsellor and social worker for 25 years — Trial judge did not find that conviction would definitely affect her employment, but possibility existed, and such conviction would necessarily result in criminal record — There was no likelihood of re-offending — Conditional discharge would not be contrary to public interest.

In the 1982 case of R. v. Cotton Felts, the first sentencing appeal under the POA to reach the Ontario Court of Appeal, the court held that general deterrence was the primary objective of sentencing under the POA.

My opposition to the measure has not been grounded in inherent moral disapproval but is instead rooted in a combination of two factors: a utilitarian concern over wrongful convictions, and a practical objection to the use of a measure that has shown no ability to effect general deterrence.

We agree with the government that the sentence is unreasonable and that it did not give adequate consideration to the seriousness of the offense, the need for general deterrence for white - collar crimes, and the need for some imprisonment.

It is that general deterrence which is necessary to eradicate sexual abuse of patients.»

As we see it, this probationary sentence utterly failed to adequately promote general deterrence, reflect the seriousness of Pugh's offense, show respect for the law, or address in any way the relevant Guidelines policy statements and directives.

«Insurers may well wish to deploy the tort with a view to heightening general deterrence of fraudulent claims»

However, the experience in relation to Hayward and Direct Line Group Plc, discussed above, shows that that may not necessarily be the case and, in any event, insurers may well wish to deploy the tort with a view to heightening general deterrence of fraudulent claims.

«[A] chieving effective general and specific deterrence requires that individuals face a very real prospect of serving time in prison if they are convicted for having engaged in such conduct.»

Payne's book in a nutshell: 1) politicians and most senior officials operate with the belief that there is a dependable «rational» basis for successful deterrence in which «rational» US opponents will respond prudently and cautiously to US nuclear deterrence threats; 2) the re-evaluation of nuclear strategy in expert circles since the Cold War exposes the deep flaws of Cold War thinking in general and the concept of «rational» deterrence in particular (partly because strategy was dangerously influenced by ideas about rationality from economics).