SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Dumlupınar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi / 2007 / Sayı: 17

CEZAEVİNİN VE HAPSETMENİN SUÇU ENGELLEMEDEKİ ETKİSİ

Zahir Kızmaz
Pages
—
Publication Date
2015-06-20
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Finally, the new approaches being developed, giving more importance to the punishment policies in the society, maintaining only the persistent criminals to being sent to prison with a selective incarcaretion policy, and the rehabilitation programmes in the prison are emphasized as an alternative to the prison

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This article focuses on what level the prison and imprisonment deter the individuals and the society from committing crime.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The effect of imprisonment as a sort of punishment and so, the effects of the prison on the prisoners is discussed.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Finally, the new approaches being developed, giving more importance to the punishment policies in the society, maintaining only the persistent criminals to being sent to prison with a selective incarcaretion policy, and the rehabilitation programmes in the prison are emphasized as an alternative to the prison
🔬Design:Makale
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Hapsetmenin caydırıcılığı · cezaevi alt-kültürü · cezaevi alternatifi yaklaşımlar

Abstract

This article focuses on what level the prison and imprisonment deter the individuals and the society from committing crime. The effect of imprisonment as a sort of punishment and so, the effects of the prison on the prisoners is discussed. In this study, it is particularly tried to determine through “prison sub-culture” why some of the released prisoners commit crime again. From this aspect, only imprisonment does not effectively have an deterring role on the criminals. Finally, the new approaches being developed, giving more importance to the punishment policies in the society, maintaining only the persistent criminals to being sent to prison with a selective incarcaretion policy, and the rehabilitation programmes in the prison are emphasized as an alternative to the prison

Özet

Bu makale, cezaevi ve hapsetmenin bireyleri ve toplumu suç işlemekten ne düzeyde caydırdığı sorunsalı üzerine odaklanmaktadır. Bununla ilintili olarak bir cezalandırılma biçimi olarak hapsetmenin ve dolayısıyla cezaevinin mahkumlar üzerindeki etkisi tartışılmaktadır. Bu çalışmada, cezaevinden salıverilen bazı suçluların yeniden suç işleme nedeni olarak “cezaevi alt-kültürü” faktörü irdelenmeye çalışılmaktadır. Bu çerçevede, suçluların sadece hapsedilmeleri veya cezaevine kapatılmalarının, suçlular üzerinde istenilen veya beklenen düzeyde caydırıcı bir işlev görmediği ileri sürülmektedir. Sonuç olarak; cezaevine alternatif olarak yeni yaklaşımların geliştirilmesi, toplumda cezalandırma politikalarına ağırlık verilmesi, secici bir tutuklama politikası ile sadece azılı suçluların hapsedilmelerinin sağlanması ve suçluların cezaevine kapatılmaları ile birlikte rehabilitasyon çalışmalarının da bu sürece eşlik etmesi gerekliliğinin önemi vurgulanmaktadır

🔖

Cite This Article

Kızmaz, Z. (2015). CEZAEVİNİN VE HAPSETMENİN SUÇU ENGELLEMEDEKİ ETKİSİ. Dumlupınar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, Sayı: 17. https://ajindex.com/articles/1387831

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (30)

  1. Adler, Freda, Gerhard O.W. Mueller ve William S. Laufer (1995) Criminology, USA: McGraw-Hill
  2. Bahar, Halil İ. (2005), “Hapishaneler, Sorunlar ve Çözüm Arayışları”, Hapishane Kitabı, (Ed. Emine Gürsoy Naskali ve Hilal Oytun Altun), İstanbul: Kitabevi Yay.
  3. Barlow, Hugh D. (1993), Introduction to Criminology, USA: Harper Collins College Pub.
  4. Bonn, Robert L. (1984), Criminology, USA: McGraw-Hill,
  5. Clemmer, Donald (1940), The Prison Community, New York: Holt, Rinehart ve Winston
  6. Clemmer, Donald (1970), “Prisonization”, The Sociolgy of Punsihment and Correction (Ed. Norman Johnston v.d), New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc Cohen, Lawrence ve Kenneth Land (1987), “Age Structure and Crime: Symmetry Versus Asymmetry and The Projection of Crime Rates Through the 1990s”, American Sociological Review, 52 (2), 170-183 DeKeseredy,
  7. Criminology, USA: Wadsworth Pub. ve Martin Schwartz (1996),
  8. Contemporary DeFina, Robert H. ve Thomas M. Arvanites (2002), “The Week Effect of Imprisonment on Crime: 1971-1998”, Social Science Quarterly, Vol. 83, Number 3
  9. Demirbaş, Timur (2005), “Hürriyeti Bağlayıcı Cezaların ve Cezaevlerinin Evrimi”, Hapishane Kitabı, (Ed. Emine Gürsoy Naskali ve Hilal Oytun Altun), İstanbul: Kitabevi Yay.
  10. Devine, Joel, Joseph Sheley, ve M. Dwayne Smith, (1998), Macroeconomic and Social Control Policy Influences on Crime Rate Changes: 1948-1985”, American Sociological Review, 53 (3), 407-420
  11. Foucault, Michel (2003), İktidarın Gözü, İstanbul: Ayrıntı yayınları
  12. Giddens, Anthony (2000), Sosyoloji, Ankara: Ayraç yay.
  13. Ghiglieri, Michael P.(2002), Erkeğin Karanlık Yüzü, (çev.Ülgen Yıldız), Ankara:Phoenix Yayınları
  14. İçli, Tülin ve Aslıhan Öğün (1999), Türkiye’de Cezaevlerindeki rehabilitasyon Faaliyetleriyle İlgili Sosyolojik Bir Analiz, Ankara: Adalet Bakanlığı Yayınları
  15. Kifer, Misty, Craig Hemmens ve Mary K. Stohr (2003), “The Goals of Corrections: Perspectives From The Line”, Criminal Justice Review, Vol. 28, Num. 1, 47-69
  16. Kury, Helmut, Theodore N. Ferdinand ve Joachim Obergfell-Fuchs (2003), “Does Severe Punishment Mean Less Criminality?”, International Criminal Justice Review, Vol 13, P.110- 147
  17. Lemert, Edwin M. (1951), Social Pathology, New York: McGraw-Hill
  18. Livingston, Jay (1996), Crime and Criminology, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall
  19. Othmani, Ahmed (2003), Hapishaneden Çıkış: Dünyadaki Cezaevi sistemlerinde Reform Mücadelesi, (çev. Işık Ergüden), İstanbul: Metis Yay.
  20. Pulkkinen, L. (1988), “Delinquent Development: Theoretical and Empirical Considerations” Studies of Psychosocial Risk: The Power of Longitudinal Data içinde (Ed. M. Rutter), Cambridge: Cambridge of University Press
  21. Siegel, Larry J. (1989), Criminology, St.Paul: West Pub. Company,
  22. Sutherland, Edwin H. (1947), Principles of Criminology, (4. Basım), Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott
  23. Sykes, Gresham (1970), “The Pains of Imprisonment”, The Sociolgy of Punsihment and Correction (Ed. Norman Johnston v.d), New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.
  24. Toby, Jackson (1971), “Is Punishment Necessary”, Theories of Punishment (ed. Stanley E. Grupp), Bloomington: Indiana University Press
  25. Türk Ceza Kanunu (2005), Seçkin Yayıncılık
  26. Wikstoem, Per-Olof (1987), Patterns of Crime in a Birth Cohort, Stockholm: University of Stockholm Department of Sociology
  27. Wolfgang, Marvin, Robert M. Figlio ve Thoırsten Sellin (1972), Delinquency in a Birth Cohort. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  28. Clemmer, Donald (1970), “Prisonization”, The Sociolgy of Punsihment and Correction (Ed. Norman Johnston v.d), New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc Cohen, Lawrence ve Kenneth Land (1987), “Age Structure and Crime: Symmetry Versus Asymmetry and The Projection of Crime Rates Through the 1990s”, American Sociological Review, 52 (2), 170-183 DeKeseredy,
  29. Devine, Joel, Joseph Sheley, ve M. Dwayne Smith, (1998), Macroeconomic and Social Control Policy Influences on Crime Rate Changes: 1948-1985”, American Sociological Review, 53 (3), 407-420
  30. Wolfgang, Marvin, Robert M. Figlio ve Thoırsten Sellin (1972), Delinquency in a Birth Cohort. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.