Reformative Sentence

It may be quite rightly contended, that the convict will always be judged from a moral angle when it comes to a decision on the kind of punishment: Should he repent his crime, he may be leniently dealt with; if he does not show any signs of contrition, the punishment will be severe. However a rather psychological judgment on the inner motives of the criminal is possible without moralizing. Punishment of a social nature that follows, is not the same as retribution.

For its function is not expiation of a moral sin, but primarily protection of the community against a member who has proved to be lacking in social virtues.

The more dangerous and incorrigible the delinquent, the stronger the protection, the heavier the penalty. The imprisonment term would be longer, should it take longer to instill into him the social virtues.

Thus social punishment is a means of reformation also, since it prepares the convict for re-entry into the community as a good and respectable citizen. He may, of course, take the hardship of imprisonment as a pennance for moral aberration into the bargain. But that is his own private business.

A good prisoner, who makes the best of his penalty, may cease to be dangerous before he has served his sentence. Discharging him would be a logical thing to do, but this seems undesirable. Further detention does not necessarily turn the punishment into a form of retribution: its justification lies in the deterrent effect it has on the community.