Home Politics & Debate
If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨

an eye for an eye.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/3313207.stm

My immediate views on this is `how can you argue with that`.
Is this sort of thing wrong? If so, Why?
If you agree with it, why?
Beep boop. I'm a bot.

Comments

  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I agree, and I think in some circumstances should be implemented here.
    Yes, critics say it is nothing but revenge, but thats what the people want, revenge on their attackers.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Revenge is an understandable human reaction, its only natural to want to get even with someone who has done you wrong.

    But in a civilised legal society there is no place for revenge. A revenge action is not just, a revenge action is not even punishment, though I suppose it makes the victim feel better.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Kermit, would that mean that sentances given out to criminals are then an act of rehabiliation, and not punishment in the west?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Jacqueline the Ripper
    Kermit, would that mean that sentances given out to criminals are then an act of rehabiliation, and not punishment in the west?

    Not exclusively.

    Justice in the West is not focused solely on the destruction of the offender, it focuses on punishing them enough to provide a deterrent from the crime whilst also attempting to rehabilitate the offender as well. That is why in the UK parole is granted early to those who have responded well to rehabilitation treatment, and have expressed genuine remorse for the crime.

    Throwing acid in this guys face gives him no chance to repent, no chance to be remorseful and never do anything like it again. People can repent, people can become good, and any justice system has to acknowledge that fact- its why the death penalty is so abhorrent too.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Trouble is, people are becoming increasingly disiilusioned with a justice system that seems to be rewarding crime or not taking it seriously.
    The courts are listening to the human rights lawyers and not the people.
    Vinnie Jones for example, recieving community service and a £300 fine isn't a deterrent or punishment for his crimes.

    The failed asylum seeker being sent to prison for 4 fucking months for knocking over and killing a small child, when he should have been sent back to the shithole from whence he came.

    These are just 2 examples of why people are beginning to favour revenge instead of "justice". At the moment there is no justice, and it is sickening.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Whowhere
    Trouble is, people are becoming increasingly disiilusioned with a justice system that seems to be rewarding crime or not taking it seriously.
    The courts are listening to the human rights lawyers and not the people.
    At the moment there is no justice, and it is sickening.

    Careful there, Whowhere... :crazyeyes

    You might get confused with being...

    ME! :eek:
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Kermit
    Throwing acid in this guys face gives him no chance to repent, no chance to be remorseful and never do anything like it again. People can repent, people can become good, and any justice system has to acknowledge that fact- its why the death penalty is so abhorrent too.
    I see what you are saying, but its all very well someone repenting AFTER theyve destroyed someone elses life. I actually disagree with the death penalty too, but im unsure what I think about this issue. I dont think it is revenge because its not doled out by the victim or anyone connected with her, it does seem like the ultimate form of justice.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Re: an eye for an eye.
    Originally posted by rainbow brite
    Is this sort of thing wrong? If so, Why?

    Because if it was wrong for them to do it, why is it right for the state to do it?

    Two wrongs don't make a right.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by rainbow brite
    I see what you are saying, but its all very well someone repenting AFTER theyve destroyed someone elses life...I dont think it is revenge because its not doled out by the victim

    Of course its supposedly easy to repent after damaging someone elses life, but is there anyone out there who HASNT done anything in anger or on the spur of the moment...if there is, could they step forward now. What this man did was just the extreme end of that, its not excusing it but it is explaining it.

    People should be given second chances unless they demonstrate otherwise. Such as with Vincent Jones, who should be in jail for what he did, especially seeing as Ian Brown got sent down for a lot less. But the mistakes of the justice system in this country doesnt mean that other systems are better, they are invariably worse- our problems are personal not systematic.

    Oh, and it is still revenge because it is being carried out on behalf of the victim- the victim or her family could stop it if they chose to, but they dont choose to. Therefore it is on her behalf, therefore it is revenge.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I bet that bloke doesnt do it again though!
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Just because you disaggree with a handful of judgements does not mean there is "no justice" that is such a generalisation.

    Its not like you hear "man got 5 years in jail and family of victim feel this was right" on the news, but that doesnt mean it doesnt happen.

    Reverting to a revenge based justice system is a dangerous move, it brings out a very dangerous edge in people I think. You only have to look at the crowds that gather outside the jails in the US when someone is put to death to see something is grossly wrong there. This kind of action shouldnt be encourged, it brings out the worst in people.

    People should of course be punished for their crimes, but there is a difference between that and revenge. The state should organise it because the victim is not in a rational state to be able to decide the outcome.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by rainbow brite
    I bet that bloke doesnt do it again though!

    Bet he does actually, in for a penny in for a pound. What would they do, blind him with acid again?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by rainbow brite
    I bet that bloke doesnt do it again though!

    Maybe not but he is likely to be bitter and hateful for the rest of his days, like kermit suggest maybe he or friends/family will look for further revenge on the other family, a cycle of vioence may only just be beginning with this......
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    its not the same as killing him though is it. its different to the death penalty in that there is still a chance for him to be rehabilitated. How could there be any doubt that the punishment fits the crime, if the punishment is the same as the crime. Im not saying it would work here, or even if I would approve of that, but it just seems really interesting. I can see how it could be seen as barbaric to some people, but I find it hard to see it as that because hes only getting done to him, what he did to somebody else.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    But there are important differences.

    As mentioned above his decision to commit the crime was taken alone and probably in the heat of anger and enmotion.

    The decision for his punishment is taken collectively with the ability to make a rational decision, how can the two be compared/

    Furthermore if the punsihmnet is to truly fit the crime then surely this man should not be put in prison?

    Would this be sensible?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    "Im not saying it would work here, or even if I would approve of that"

    Rainbow Bright, if you wouldnt approve of it here, why is it alright to be carried out anywhere else?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by bongbudda
    "Im not saying it would work here, or even if I would approve of that"

    Rainbow Bright, if you wouldnt approve of it here, why is it alright to be carried out anywhere else?
    because its not something weve done before (as far as I know) Im not 100% sure if I entirely agree with it over there either, Im undecided on it. I like the idea of the punishment fitting the crime like that, and although the idea of blinding someone with acid as a punishment seems barbaric, it is exactly what he did to his fiancee so its not an unfair punishment. I guess im looking at itin a different way because its over the other side of the world, than I would if it was happening on my doorstep. Im not sure I agree with the lenient sentances given for violent crimes here, especially when compared to the higher sentances often given out for crimes against property or money.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    That sounds to me, slighty as though you are more accepting of barbaric justice as long as its 'not on your doorstep'. Why is it any better for being far away?

    As for tougher sentances here, I think you'll get your way, the pendulum always swings one way then the other. It was tough on crime etc. under the tories and then slightly the other way with Labour. But now, even though the crime rates are down everyone thinks we are a drift in a sea of drug dealing child murders. So sentances will go up. Its the way of things, always has been.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by bongbudda
    That sounds to me, slighty as though you are more accepting of barbaric justice as long as its 'not on your doorstep'. Why is it any better for being far away?

    well I think thats quite a harsh thing to imply, and its not a debate about my views, its a debate about the link I posted so please keep on track.
    I am accepting of it over there in the same way that I shed no tears if a convicted rapist gets done over whilst hes in jail in this country.
    If someone gets their just desserts for what theyve done then I generally dont have a problem with it. The only thing that makes me feel uneasy about this case is the fact that its the state doing it . I cant imagine anyone wanting that job.
    My views dont change acording to country, but i admit it is easier to look at it objectively if it is something thats not likely to happen to anyone I know (because its in a faraway country).
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I certainly did mean to offend, I was just trying to understand what you had said thats all.

    I can see what you are saying about it being "fair" because he is getting exactly what he did back in return. But, well there is something deeply un-nerving about a State getting involved in such actions.

    This is torture, theres no getting away from that, whether it is called punishment or not.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by bongbudda

    there is something deeply un-nerving about a State getting involved in such actions.

    This is torture, theres no getting away from that, whether it is called punishment or not.

    I do agree, the state involvement is the thing I have issue with. I can see why you say its torture, but to me, being locked up in a jail would be torture, yet if id done something to warrant it then its fair. I think its a very scary thought that the state would flick acid in someones eyes, but I see this as less problematic than the state cutting off somones hand for stealing, or stoning someone for adultery, because in those two cases the punishment is far far worse than the crime. This man is getting nothing worse than what he did to someone else
Sign In or Register to comment.