Against Supermax

Journal of Applied Philosophy 21 (2):109-124 (2004)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

abstract Supermax prisons subject inmates to extreme isolation and sensory deprivation for extended periods of time. Crime reduction and retributive arguments in favour of supermax confinement are elaborated. Both types of arguments are shown to falter once the logic of the two approaches to the justification of legal punishment is made clear and evidence about the effects of supermax confinement on inmates is considered. It is also argued that many criminal offenders suffer from defects in their capacities for morally responsible action, lack sufficient opportunities to remain law‐abiding, or are understandably alienated from society and the prison regime. The implications of this more realistic picture of offenders for supermax confinement are then explored briefly.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,075

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

Against supermax.Richard L. Lippke - 2004 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 21 (2):109–124.
Supermax as a Technology of Punishment.Lorna Rhodes - 2007 - Social Research: An International Quarterly 74:547-566.
Supermax as a technology of punishment.Lorna A. Rhodes - 2007 - Social Research: An International Quarterly 74 (2):547-566.
Beyond Dehumanization: A Post-Humanist Critique of Intensive Confinement.Lisa Guenther - 2012 - Journal of Critical Animal Studies. Special Issue on Animals and Prisons 10 (2).
Retributive parsimony.Richard L. Lippke - 2009 - Res Publica 15 (4):377-395.

Analytics

Added to PP
2017-02-20

Downloads
16 (#908,545)

6 months
5 (#643,111)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Richard Lippke
Indiana University, Bloomington

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references