Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
An Essay On An Eye For An Eye
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: An Essay On An Eye For An Eye
"An eye for an eye", one phrase that is used as more than just fiction and in some countries it is the basis of their criminal law. The phrase "an eye for an eye" in the criminal world refers to the term retaliation; the law of retaliation. It's the principle that a person who has done harm to another person is penalized to a similar degree. For example, someone who takes a life might expect to give up his or her own life in return. This concept is suppose to present to people that the punishment for their crime will be just given to the same degree as the crime that was done. However, in this day and age people have no regard for consequences and many expect to get away with their crimes therefore making this concept of punishment hard and unable to be an effective deterrent. One reason this concept for punishment is ineffective is because many people have no regard for consequences. Some people don't think about the fact that there are payments that need to be paid for every action that is made. There should be many things in peoples lives that discourages them from …show more content…
There are crimes committed all the time and with many of these crimes people do not want to face the consequences for their actions. Sometimes this leads to people running, hiding, and skipping town to get away from the law. It's almost as if they believe if they aren't around they won't get caught of become a suspect. However, there cannot be just one main reason to determine why people believe they will get away with their crime. Some may believe answering the right questions the correct way will get them off, or blending in with every day life, or moving to another state or across the country will help their case. Either way they choose to go, they feel that these action will help them get away free of punishment after committing a
takes the form of “an eye for an eye”, meaning that the offender should be punished by an act of
Finally it is not cost efficient or effective. The certainty of arrest, prosecution, conviction, imprisonment and punishment has a far greater deterrent effect than the brutality of punishment.
middle of paper ... ... For that, it is hard to say whether it is effective in the United States in its current state. It might just be a problem with implementation. Conclusion: All in all, intermediate sanctions have been shown to be an effective alternative to prison.
Revenge is best served cold or so says the well-known expression. This idea of revenge that they seek is usually to restore balance and take an “eye for an eye” as the Bible says. Revenge, if by chance everyone were in Plato’s perfect utopia, would be in a perfect form, where justice and revenge would be one, and the coined phrase “eye for an eye” would be taken literally. By taking an eye for and eye, and punishing those who did wrong equally as they did wrong, there is justice. However, this revenge sometimes goes too far and is consequently not justice.
It is understandable why a criminal would lie about committing a crime which they did commit to get out of trouble and stay out of jail. In majority of prisons worldwide, 90% of convicted criminals claim innocence. Many people are in the opposite situation when they are being accused of a crime they do not know about or not connected to and police officers or investigators are profiling them based on previous case...
In the excerpt from Stephen Nathanson’s 1987 book entitled An Eye for an Eye?, he argues against the “eye for an eye” principle, or lex talionis. The principle states that the punishment given to criminals should be equal to what they did to their victims. Nathanson argues that there are two problems with this principle. First, it permits and justifies extremely immoral actions - rape and murder are not in any way morally permissible and people should not be subjected to such treatment. Second, it is extremely difficult and often impossible to apply to most cases. Making the punishment equal the crime in cases of drug trafficking, drunk driving, or unlawful possession is simply not possible, so therefore the principle crumbles and is revealed
"An eye for an eye", this quote is used often among many diversities of people; however, Edgar Allan Poe took this quote to extremes in his story The Cask of Amontillado. Poe's usage of dramatic and verbal irony, foreshadowing and symbolism brings about a strong tale of revenge. Revenge is a feeling that has the ability to over come a person's grip on reality. The narrator, Montresor feels that he was greatly insulted by the unfortunate Fortunado. For this reason Montresor seeks revengeance on Fortunado for his heinous crime.
Retribution is the philosophy best explained by the famous saying, “an eye for an eye”. Those that believe in this form of justice hold a strict and harsh view on punishments for crime. The proponents of retribution believe that severe penalties act as deterrence to future crime, however, studies
heinous crimes. Take in account the need for justice, (“An Eye for an Eye”) capital punishment carries
The death penalty is the lawful killing of a human being after a trial by
penalty punishes them not for what they may or may not do in the future but what
Society has many different views on crime and punishment. During earlier times, the crime fit the punishment meaning an “eye for an eye” approach. If a thief was caught, their hands would be cut off. If a man killed another man, they would be killed as well. They did not have a chance to tell their side of the story, if people thought they were guilty, they were. Much has changed in the way we handle crime in the world today. In today’s world, when a person commits a crime they have rights to a fair trial and have the luxury of the Fifth Amendment. Now when a killer kills someone they get to tell their side of the story and have to be proven guilty. However, it does not matter where you go, if there are people then there will always be crime.
Provide the justifications for punishment in modern society. Punishment functions as a form of social control and is geared towards “imposing some unwanted burden such as fines, probations, imprisonment, or even death” on a convicted person in return for the crimes they committed (Stohr, Walsh, & Hemmens, 2013, p.6). There are four main justifications for punishment and they are: retribution, deterrence, rehabilitation, and incapacitation. There is also said to be a fifth justification of reintegration as well.
punishment to be done to whoever did the crime. If the criminal doesn't get the kind of
Punishment has been in existence since the early colonial period and has continued throughout history as a method used to deter criminals from committing criminal acts. Philosophers believe that punishment is a necessity in today’s modern society as it is a worldwide response to crime and violence. Friedrich Nietzche’s book “Punishment and Rehabilitation” reiterates that “punishment makes us into who we are; it creates in us a sense of responsibility and the ability to take and release our social obligations” (Blue, Naden, 2001). Immanuel Kant believes that if an individual commits a crime then punishment should be inflicted upon that individual for the crime committed. Cesare Beccaria, also believes that if there is a breach of the law by individuals then that individual should be punished accordingly.