The Incompleteness of ‘Punishment as Fair Play’: A Response to Dagger
Richard Dagger (in this issue) provides perhaps the most persuasive version of a ‘fair play’ theory of criminal punishment, grounded in an attractive liberal republican political theory. But, I argue, his version of the theory still faces serious objections: that its explanation of why some central...
Saved in:
Published in | Res publica (Liverpool, England) Vol. 14; no. 4; pp. 277 - 281 |
---|---|
Main Author | |
Format | Journal Article |
Language | English |
Published |
Dordrecht
Springer Netherlands
01.12.2008
Springer Nature B.V |
Subjects | |
Online Access | Get full text |
Cover
Loading…
Summary: | Richard Dagger (in this issue) provides perhaps the most persuasive version of a ‘fair play’ theory of criminal punishment, grounded in an attractive liberal republican political theory. But, I argue, his version of the theory still faces serious objections: that its explanation of why some central mala in se are properly criminalised is still distorting, despite his appeal to the burdens of ‘general compliance’; and that it cannot adequately explain (as it should explain) the differential seriousness and wrongfulness of different kinds of crime. |
---|---|
Bibliography: | ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 23 |
ISSN: | 1356-4765 1572-8692 |
DOI: | 10.1007/s11158-008-9072-0 |