There are various advantages and disadvantages of conclusive imprisonment. This particular kind is defined to a certain period until the court or the in charge company decides otherwise. In case of such a sentencing the person being jailed is not given any leniency when deciding their period of sentence. They cannot argue nor can they negotiate the time period which they would be required to send in jail. This varies from state to state.

This kind of a punishment is often given to those people who, influenced by drugs, conduct certain illegal activities that threaten the state. There are various ways in which this kind of sentencing can be advantageous to the security of the state and to the offender, whereas several people still seem to have certain reservations. These are the reasons why various states do not often support the idea.


  • The reason why this concept is so adamantly supported is because it ensures that the offender is not being let off the hook as a result of a prejudice or predisposition. As a result of this, it is never important who the offender is and if the judge even likes them or not, their punishment does not waver. Despite their belief system, the sentence time remains the same for all.
  • There is nothing of the offense that might determine the kind of punishment given. The mode of this punishment is standard and does not change. This way, no matter who the offender is, they always know what the outcome of the act would be.
  • Because of the above two reasons, a certain extent of fear is imposed in the hearts of possible offenders. When they know that no matter who they are their punishment will not be wavered off nor would they be let off the hook, they are more likely to stay on the right track and not take any chances.


  • Where some people consider the above as advantages, for other states these are disadvantages. Some states believe that if the offender is intoxicated at the time of the crime and does not even know what he is doing then the idea of an inflexible punishment makes no sense. Hence, they believe the penalties should vary given the state of the offender. It should not be fixed as it makes it irrelevant.
  • When people will be jailed regardless of the fact that they were at fault or not, it will only overcrowd the jails pointlessly.
  • Some states believe that spending so much money catering for prisoners who can be given a warning might help save a lot of money annually.
  • Sometimes the judge might play the part and try and waver away the punishment weakening the entire system altogether.
  • Sometimes the laws might vary altogether and be very difficult for the judge to comprehend resulting in an incorrect and hast decision. This might send someone innocent to jail without them being allowed to negotiate or argue.

Hence, it is important to understand where it is supported and why.

Bill Collins is the author of this article. He refers to the website to help people understand the ways in which sentencing works.