Resulting Harms and Objective Risks as Constraints on Punishment

Law and Philosophy 29 (4):401-418 (2010)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This article has no associated abstract. (fix it)

Categories

Keywords

Reprint years

DOI

10.1007/s10982-010-9070-1

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,774

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

My notes

Similar books and articles

Culpability and the Relevance of Substantial Risks, Motivations, and Lesser Harms.Jim Staihar - 2010 - Law and Philosophy 29 (4):385-400.
Culpability and the definition of deontological constraints.John Oberdiek - 2008 - Law and Philosophy 27 (2):105 - 122.
Is the idea of objective probability incoherent?Eric A. Johnson - 2010 - Law and Philosophy 29 (4):419-432.
The general/special distinction in criminal law, tort law and legal theory.Peter Cane - 2007 - Law and Philosophy 26 (5):465-500.
Democracy and restraint.Steven Wall - 2006 - Law and Philosophy 26 (3):307-342.
Punishment and revenge.Leo Zaibert - 2006 - Law and Philosophy 25 (1):81-118.
Modeling Criminal Law.Ronald J. Allen - 2010 - Law and Philosophy 29 (4):469-481.
Forced assistance.Gerhard Øverland - 2009 - Law and Philosophy 28 (2):203 - 232.
Correlativity.Ronen Perry - 2010 - Law and Philosophy 29 (1):121-121.
Book review. [REVIEW]Susan J. Brison - 2008 - Law and Philosophy 27 (1):97-104.

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-05-07

Downloads
25 (#150,191)

6 months
3 (#1,723,834)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references