Skip to main content icon/video/no-internet
icon backReturn to Entries

Selective Incapacitation

Selective incapacitation is the practice of separating, usually through imprisonment or another form of confinement, some criminal offenders from the noncriminal members of society. It differs from strict (or general) incapacitation, a method of assigning penalties that is rigid in its assertion that (1) sentencing of convicted criminals should adhere strictly to a rulebook; (2) during the sentencing phase of a trial, it is wrong to allow input of an individual criminal's special circumstances or to allow judicial choice of one particular penalty from among a range of penalties; (3) for each specific crime, equity mandates assignment of only one appropriate penalty.

In contrast to strict or general incapacitation, selective incapacitation is based on the belief that it is not necessary to allot perpetrators of similar crimes similar treatment. Instead, it is argued that the severity of an individual's crime and the individual's relative risk to society are to some degree independent. Consequently, not all criminals must be separated from society in order to maintain public safety. Following reasoning that is diametrically opposed to strict or general incapacitation, selective incapacitation asks for consideration of two factors prior to sentencing a criminal: (1) it is possible for an individual to pose a far greater danger to society than his or her current crime would indicate; and (2) it is also possible for the perpetrator of a serious crime to pose no risk to the public at large.

For example, if a person with a violent criminal history were arrested for public drunkenness, he or she would probably pose a far greater danger to the public than would a college student with no criminal history, arrested for the same crime following a fraternity party. Equal treatment of these two individuals would exemplify general incapacitation, which is the same as strict incapacitation; different treatment of the two individuals, based on public risk and the potential for future criminal behavior, would exemplify selective incapacitation.

Selective Incapacitation in a Historical Context

Incapacitation has not always been the social response of choice for criminal behavior. The Sumerian codes, which date to 1860 BCE, defined acceptable social behavior and also outlined the punishments associated with violations of these codes. Corporal punishments, such as whipping, flogging, beating, or otherwise hurting the offender's body, were common because they were simple and could be accomplished quickly. Infliction of bodily harm on a criminal appealed to the public, which believed that criminals were unable to understand punishment on any but the most the primitive level. As long as the criminal was considered to be “less than human,” corporal punishment accomplished the goal of the society.

In the sixth century, the Roman emperor Justinian recognized the flawed logic inherent in physically punishing an offender without considering the individual, economic, and social factors that may have contributed to the crime. Justinian tried to create a code of punishment that addressed these causal factors and treated punishment in a more equitable manner. Unfortunately, the Justinian Codes fell with the Roman Empire, and the Western world went back to simple, painful forms of punishment. This punitive mentality lasted through the Middle Ages, until the Age of Enlightenment (beginning in the early eighteenth century). By the late eighteenth century, the public belief regarding both humanity and criminality had shifted, and an era of reform began. As a result of this philosophical change, public opinion began to favor reforming the offender, rather than physical punishment.

...

  • Loading...
locked icon

Sign in to access this content

Get a 30 day FREE TRIAL

  • Watch videos from a variety of sources bringing classroom topics to life
  • Read modern, diverse business cases
  • Explore hundreds of books and reference titles

Read next

More like this

Sage Recommends

We found other relevant content for you on other Sage platforms.

close

Have you created a personal profile? Login or create a profile so that you can save clips, playlists and searches

close
close
close Signed In to profile You are signed in as:
close
Logged in Institution Institution