My street law teacher in HS explained it to us. For retribution to be used correctly in our justice system, it would have to be an eye for an eye. Because if you did some horrible crime to someone, what would be the point in just putting you in a prison cell? Or, if you caused a lot of suffering to someone, what would be the point? In just making you suffer just half the pain your victim did? Or even most of the pain, let's say 75%? An eye for an eye as punishments for crimes hasn't existed since the time of George Washington and the French Revolution, When they started the prison reform movement in most countries. And as George Savile the Marquess of Halifax said in 1750, "Men are not hanged for stealing horses, but that horses may not be stolen." Because there was a rash of horse thievery in England at the time. And Parliament passed a law making that crime punishable by death. But George Savile joked in that quote, it wasn't about the rights of horses. But as a deterrent to make people think twice about committing that crime.
Retribution in this context assumes that the purpose of the justice system is to administer punishment equal to the crime committed. It ignores the fact that the justice system may be interested in protecting the public or rehabilitating the law breaker. Not just inflicting an equal amount of pain.
Also, you know, about 20 years ago they were talking about this subject. I think it was on ABC's "Primetime Live". In some states, when a prisoner thinks he has been abused in prison, he can file a complaint. But, the piece said, in some states prisoners were abusing this right. One prisoner, they said, claimed that a prison guard was punching him. When they investigated, they found that the guard was punching him in self defense, because the guard feared for his life at that point. So, the piece said, prisoners should lose the right to file complaints. Or at least it should be limited. I was thinking at the time though. That probably would be a very bad idea. Plus you know, if someone files any false legal complaint, that is always a form of obstruction of justice. Also, if a person is filing too many complaints, or if they all seem pointless and baseless, that can be an offense too. It's called barratry, or abuse of process. But I don't think prisoners should completely lose the right to file complaints. Plus, as I thought at the time. They are in a very vulnerable position, already having their movement and access to the outsider world limited. They should always have a way of reporting any abuse.
All animals are cruel. We'd call many of them, like spiders and snakes, evil even. But they're not evil, they're just animals. But humans have the choice. The choice to be cruel or kind. And the choice to be merciful or forgiving, or filled with hate. Hate even of someone who is evil. And I'm not saying some people aren't correct when they think that. But don't be like them. You don't always have to stoop to their level, and give them the attention that they are seeking too.
Also, like in the "Merchant of Venice", history won't remember you for justice you meted out, or even your strict adherence to law. Julius Caesar isn't remember for the lands he conquered or even the speed of his conquests. You're remembered for the mercy you showed, even when no one else would.
