Final answer:
Thomas More did not argue that the primary way to prevent crime was through punishment; this is a broader topic reflecting the evolution of legal systems over time. Crime prevention and the role of punishment have changed considerably, with historical and modern systems varying in their approach to justice, fairness, and rehabilitation.
Step-by-step explanation:
Thomas More did not primarily argue that the way to prevent crime was through punishment. While the historical perspective on crime and punishment has seen many changes, various individuals and legal philosophies have contributed differently to the debate on how best to manage criminal behavior. The Code of Hammurabi, for instance, promoted the idea that the punishment should fit the crime, but this also was influenced by social class. In the US, the criminal justice system has often leaned towards punishment as a means of crime prevention, though its effectiveness continues to be a subject of debate.
Throughout history, from medieval practices to the reforms in the 1800s aimed at reducing the number of capital offenses, the question of how to handle crime has evolved. Punishment and rehabilitation are parts of our justice system, now with considerations for more humane and fair treatment postulated by the Eighth Amendment and the ideas brought forward by figures such as Sir William Blackstone who emphasized the Rule of Law and fairness over excessive punishment.
The approach to crime and punishment is a reflection of societal values and beliefs at given points in history. In some legal systems, the social status greatly influenced the severity of punishment received, while modern systems strive for consistency and the protection of rights through constitutional amendments and legal philosophy.