An eye for an eye? Do you believe it?
 

That lawyer father who killed the suspected child molester... was he right in killing the guy?

Do you believe the world needs vigilantes or that our court system does justice?

Personally if someone is 100% undeniably proven to be guilty of murder, he should be shot USSR style in the back of a head and let drain into a floor drain. There is no such thing as rehabilitation. If someone commits murder they will do it again if they think they can get away with it.

Rapists should be raped.
Child rapists should have their insides gutted while they are still living, shown those insides and be forced to eat their own internal organs.

What do you feel personally?

Who is gonna rape the rapists? Then does the person who rapes the rapist have to get raped? Where will that end? I dont want to be raped...

Very good point.

You're confusing justice with revenge. Though I have no problem with either.

I'm pretty hardline regarding punishment, etc, but I don't believe in the death penalty. It isn't a deterrent nor is it a punishment. True punishment is rotting in jail under horrible conditions, now THAT was a deterrent, but these days we're supposed to be "humane" with rapists and murderers. Funny, eh?

no revenge is never a good thing, karma is a bitch and its much worse than anything you can do to a person.

I don't believe in karma.

I still have enough confidence on our justice system right now, and I still believe that no one is above the law.

justice????? where do you see that? people that kidnap, torture, rape, and cut kids to pieces are sent to jail - wow, what a fucking severe punishment!!!

make me a president of the World and I'll reduce the crime levels by 50% in ten years or less, and in the process I'll reduce the population too, also there'll be no overcrowded prisons simply because I'll get all the violent criminals shot

If he killed an innocent child - he should be killed too.

I couldn't really care less about justice or revenge: punishment for crime should simply be a way to prevent someone from offending again and as a deterrent to others. And far more emphasis should be placed on the rights of the victim than on the rights of the accused.

But in the US at least, there isn't a whole lot of point talking about punishment when the legal system by and large only works well for those who can afford it. Nor so long as, even if the process is frequently pointless, it can take years to get through a trial and the subsequent appeals.

What will all the unemployed wardens and correction officers do? Rob banks?

I agree we should adapt to other country methods. The crime rate in some of those countries are slim to none and if im wrong they're alot of dead people lol.

In many M.E. countries they will cut off your hands if you steal, very harsh penalties on drug use, very harsh penalties on sexual deviancy. Yet all of those crimes still happen in those countries with regularity. In fact, the harsher the penalties (up until a point) on certain crimes there is a greater chance that a person is going to ?go-all-the-way? out in committing said crimes.

For example: Let?s say the punishment for molesting a child was at least 20-40 years in prison, maybe life, hell maybe even death. Instead of just molesting the kid (which is bad enough), the perpetrator is now more likely to kill the child in order to cover up any evidence that anything had been done. So instead of a living child (albeit traumatized), you now have a dead child.

You can only push people so hard before they just don?t give a fuck about anything anymore; when that happens you have a society that is on the verge of collapse.

I believe in an eye for an eye with an exponential modifier. I don't start trouble, but if trouble finds me, it's time to get nuts.

except OJ Simpson, Robert Blake, and Michael Jacko

George Bush, Dick Cheney, and most Mexicans in LA.

Hitler did it in 5.

If anybody touched someone from my family, wife and kids I would certainly kill them ...

You get really jaded when you work in news for 5 plus years like I did because you see so much crap every day and it still baffles me how completely screwed up some people can be out there. Then you have a justice system where a guy who gets busted with a large amount of pot could do more time than a murderer. Just doesn't make sense sometimes. So, I guess I wouldn't mind the whole eye for an eye thing.

You are in good company :Oh crap

Countries and territories which retain the death penalty for ordinary crimes

AFGHANISTAN, ANTIGUA AND BARBUDA, BAHAMAS, BANGLADESH, BARBADOS, BELARUS, BELIZE, BOTSWANA, BURUNDI, CAMEROON, CHAD, CHINA, COMOROS, CONGO (Democratic Republic), CUBA, DOMINICA, EGYPT, EQUATORIAL GUINEA, ERITREA, ETHIOPIA, GUATEMALA, GUINEA, GUYANA, INDIA, INDONESIA, IRAN, IRAQ, JAMAICA, JAPAN, JORDAN, KAZAKSTAN, KOREA (North), KOREA (South), KUWAIT, KYRGYZSTAN, LAOS, LEBANON, LESOTHO, LIBYA, MALAYSIA, MONGOLIA, NIGERIA, OMAN, PAKISTAN, PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY, QATAR, RWANDA, SAINT CHRISTOPHER & NEVIS, SAINT LUCIA, SAINT VINCENT & GRENADINES, SAUDI ARABIA, SIERRA LEONE, SINGAPORE, SOMALIA, SUDAN, SYRIA, TAIWAN, TAJIKISTAN, TANZANIA, THAILAND, TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO, UGANDA, UNITED ARAB EMIRATES, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, UZBEKISTAN, VIET NAM, YEMEN, ZAMBIA, ZIMBABWE

Don't become that which you hate the most.

In some countries though, rape is punishable by death.

no, i dont beleive it. you take one eye, i will take two. :disgust

For starters, sex offenders should be castrated.

I don't know if they've proven for sure that the guy molested the kid, but if they're able to do that, there's no way in hell I could ever bring myself to place a guilty vote if I were on that dad's jury. Even if I knew he was technically guilty, under the definition of the law. I'd hang the whole jury before I'd cave.

Stick with the golden rule. If you hurt someone, you will pay for what you did one way or another. If you killed someone and you still on the loose, you may have freedom physically but wherever you may go, your guilty conscience will haunt you even at the middle of your sleep

A little OT: As brutal as it may sound, "an eye for an eye" (as expounded by the Babylonian king Hammurabi) was an IMPROVEMENT in their legal system. Before it was "your life for an eye." Unfortunately, in practice, Hammurabi's injunction was rarely followed. It was more of "If you're a rich noble, you can kill anyone 'lower' than you." Still a long way from US Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes' jurisprudence.

Back to the thread's main point: I don't agree with an eye for an eye since the inherent inequalities and stratification built into EVERY society will prevent it from consistently being executed (no pun intended).

If you made something bad you will pay for that or your children or even your parents, but that doesn't mean you will be punished the same wy you acted.