An eye for an eye

Does the idea of making a wrongdoer “pay” for criminal wrongdoing–in roughly the way Miller discusses–resonate with you? Or is this just a holdover from a more barbarous time? Is this something we should get past and just try to rehabilitate criminal offenders through therapy, retraining, and so on–with no punishment? Or, as distinct from these, should we punish only in order to deter future crime? You need to be clear that these are three different ideas. Don’t dodge the question by saying something vague about all these ideas having a point, or that we can somehow mix them and then everything will be fine. I will read that as dodging the question. You need to give your thoughts in a principled way that involves favoring at least one of these three systems over at least one of the others. I am not looking for a “correct” answer. I am looking for intelligent, careful reflection and clarity and care in expressing yourself.

Get 15% off your first purchase USE THE CODE VPXC