Dreamer Wrote:Life sentences don't reduce crime rates.
I like, more so, the premise of an eye for an eye jurisdiction.
Crime would go down significantly, I'm sure.
If the judges and jury never made any mistakes, that would surely be what suits people best. Unfortunately both miscarriages of justice and judicial errors exist and even 'an eye for an eye' might not be so easy to mete.
"You took my daughter's life, I'll have your daughter's life. Oh wait, you don't have a daughter... What can I have in exchange? Your son? Your wife? Your little brother?" It never ends.
The death penalty doesn't seem to solve anything. Look at the figures, there are probably more people who are killed in the USA every year than anywhere else (of countries that are living in times of peace) and yet some of the US states use the death penalty. Elsewhere, where this type of penalty has been discarded, for humanitarian and social reasons, has the murder rate risen? A culture of violence just breeds more violence.
Society will always have problems with people who are 'deranged': serial rapist, serial killers, mad people or people under the influence of drugs and drink... If we knew how to treat these problems, we would. They are part of the anomalies that life throws at us, just like random accidents that end up in casualties.
An 'eye for an eye' approach? The same goes for manslaughter as opposed to wilful murder. If you kill someone accidentally, while driving or something else, does that mean your life has to be on this line of revenge or justice? How do you kill the still living culprit? Arrange for a similar accident and violent death to occur? This man's/woman's car got out of control when a tyre puncture occurred... oh but wait, this one was driving under the influence. But they both killed someone. Do we kill both the drivers, or just give two totally different sentences according to the prejudice and the diverging lacks of respect for the law? Maybe the punctured tyre was pure bad luck, maybe the other driver shouldn't have got into their car if they'd drunk too much.
The reasons we have courts of justice is to make sure we don't do anything rash or foolish. They may not be perfect, but they are safeguards for us all.
See, if you will, '
The Life Of David Gale', or '
In the Name Of The Father' both of which illustrate this type of problem interestingly.