solved Please respond to the 2 discussion questions with at least

Please respond to the 2 discussion questions with at least 300 words EACH, at least 1 scholarly citation EACH, APA format in addition to at least 1 holy bible reference. Acceptable sources include the Snipes: Vold’s Theoretical Criminology, peer-reviewed articles, and the Bible.This is the original post, you do not need to reply to this, this is used as a reference to get a better understanding of what we are discussing. Chapter 3 of Snipes: Vold’s Theoretical Criminology discusses the prominence and role of Cesare Bonesana, marchese de Beccaria (Beccaria). Discuss specific elements of our current American criminal justice system that are based on or hold-overs from Beccaria’s work. 1) Sarah Sweet- The understanding of criminology continues to be a metamorphosis with researchers contributing to existing theories established by philosophers of the past. Cesare Bonesana, marchese de Beccaria is one of the most noteworthy contributors to the field of criminology. Undeterred by the mainstream belief in the spiritual explanation of crime, and controversial in his concepts, Beccaria proposed systems and methods contrary to the existing, church-backed practices. Beccaria introduced classical criminology to a society accustomed to doling out barbaric punishments in answer to crimes they viewed as crimes against God. Beccaria believed that human criminal behavior was the result of social inequities and the individual weighing the costs and benefits of their actions. As such, he proposed several changes to the existing criminal justice system. Beccaria was opposed to judicial discretion, instead promoting legislative definitions of crime and their set punishments. As a part of this, judges should be limited strictly to the establishment of guilt or innocence.Beccaria also disagreed with any differentiations in punishment based on aggravating or mitigating circumstances. His stance was that “Sometimes, with the best intentions, men do the greatest injury to society; at other times, intending the worst for it, they do the greatest good,” (Snipes, 2019)Another assertion of Beccaria’s is of punishment being a deterrent and proportionate to the seriousness of the crime, with the goal of making the cost outweigh the benefit. He advised that excessive punishment encouraged crime rather than deterring it. For example, if the punishment for stealing was execution, an offender may feel they have nothing to lose by killing a victim.Retribution versus deterrence remains a contentious topic. Beccaria opposed excessive, retributive punishment in favor of deterrence. While punishment may have a deterrent effect, it is a question of whether it is a tool of’ just deserts or a means of discouraging potential criminal behavior (Deogaonkar, 2021) The Lord reserved revenge for himself. Leviticus 19: 18 commands, “Do not seek revenge or bear a grudge against a fellow Israelite but love your neighbor as yourself. I am the Lord.” He then refers to his own revenge in Deuteronomy 32:35 that reads, “I will take revenge; I will pay them back. In due time their feet will slip. Their day of disaster will arrive, and their destiny will overtake them,” (Holy Bible, NLT). Belief that God reserves vengeance for himself alone, humankind must refrain from retributive punishments in favor of deterrence.One of the main concepts suggested by Beccaria is that punishment should be prompt. If the punishment phase of the justice system comes too late, it creates a disassociation from the crime and negates the deterrent effect. In addition to promptness, punishment should be certain. If a punishment is uncertain there is little to discourage the offense.Beccaria recommended that the laws be published to the public. His assertion is that without knowledge of the law, an individual would be denied of the option to choose the appropriate behavior. While this may seem common sense, modern society takes it for granted that laws are made known, in writing, for the public to understand.In the Journal of Law and Religion, Albert Alschuler highlights the utilization of discretion in the American criminal justice system to this day. Discretion plays a part in almost every part of the process. At the beginning of the process, law enforcement is able to use discretion when deciding whether or not to charge an individual with a crime. If, for example, they decide the homeless person who stole a sandwich, nor the public, would benefit from an arrest, they could choose to end the process by issuing a warning. A judge often uses discretion when determining sentences, perhaps ordering a lighter sentence on an offender who had mitigating circumstances and a stiffer sentence on an offender with aggravating circumstances. Alschuler, however, describes discretion gone wrong when referring to the practice of Presidential pardons. He provides the example of President Clinton and his pardon of a billionaire, white-collar criminal who also happened to be a major campaign contributor as an example of inappropriately utilized discretion that encourages crime (Alschuler, 2020).ReferencesAlschuler, A. (2020, April). Justice, Mercy, and Equality in Descretionary Criminal Justice Decision Making. The Journal of Law and Religion, 35(1), 18-32.Deogaonkar, A. (2021). Retributivism: Punishment and Justification. International Journal of Criminal Justice Sciences, 16(1), 17-33.Snipes, e. a. (2019). Vold’s Theoretical Criminology. Oxford University Press2) Miriam Foxx – In 1764, Cesare Bonesana, marchese de Beccaria, a newly graduated law student wrote an essay on crime and punishment. At that time, his reform ideas were considered radical, so he initially published anonymously.Below are some of his principles.-The role of the legislatures should be to define crimes and to define specific punishments for each crime.-The role of judges should be to determine guilt; whether the defendant had committed a crime-The seriousness of a crime is determined by the extent of harm that it inflicts on society.-The purpose of punishment is to deter crime; so, punishment should be proportionate to the seriousness of the crime.-Punishments are unjust when their severity exceeds what is necessary to achieve deterrence.-Excessive severity not only fails to deter crime but actually increases it.-Punishments should be prompt: The more promptly and the more closely punishment follows upon the commission of a crime, the more just and useful it will be.This week’s readings were my first introduction to Becarria and I realized there were some definite similarities based on my experience as a detective in investigations. I worked closely with the Deputy District Attorney’s office on several cases I was the lead detective on.Our Court system is based on or is a holdover from Becarria’s work. Becarria’s principles were obscure at that time but are standard in today’s criminal justice system.For example, Becarria’s principle on the legislature to define crimes and specific punishments for those crimes are like the State of California penal code laws that determine what is a crime and what elements are needed to violate that crime including punishment guidelines.When a defendant is arrested, the case is reviewed by the Deputy District Attorney who determines whether to issue the case against the defendant. If issued and the defendant pleads not guilty the case ultimately goes to trial (barring any dismissal of charges or motions/hearings). During trial is where the judge or jury hears all the evidence and if found guilty then sentencing happens. This part in the trial process is related to Becarria’s role of judges’ principle where guilt is determined.The judge presiding over the case will then determine the appropriate sentencing (based on Misdemeanor or Felony sentencing guidelines). In California, there are also timeframes for when the punishment be handed down for both Misdemeanor and Felony cases. The sentencing phase is related to Becarria’s rules on punishment being proportionate and prompt.Looking at scripture; Romans 13:1 discusses judgement, deterrence of crime and punishment. I thought this was appropriate for this week’s discussion question.‘Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, for he is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer.’ (Romans 13:1 ESV)Crime and punishment has been a part of the human experience since the beginning of time.Bonesana, C., & Beccaria, M. (1764). Of crimes and punishments. Trans. Edward D. Ingraham . Milan.Snipes, J. B., Bernard, T. J., & Gerould, A. L. (2019). Vold’s criminological theory. OXFORD UNIV Press US.The Holy Bible, English Standard Version. ESV Text Edition: 2016. Good News Publishers.