What do you think if "An eye for an eye?"

[Fawlty]

History class was destroyed ITT...

Sad..

"eye for an eye" has got to be one of the worst offenders when it comes to butchering history too lol

 

[HomerThompson]

*of

 

[plataoplombo]

Can be good to a certain extent, but can also escalate real quick. Kinda like Hatfields and McCoys

 

[SaiWa]

So if someone rapes me I have to rape them back?

does it have to the one that rapes you or can it be someone that's close or related to them (someone hotter and of the preferred sex)?.. just sayin'... umm yeah... not trying to take advantage of this by being taken advantage of u know... wait wat?

 

[TSO]

I'm not too clued up on this but in the bible it states "eye for an eye" yes? But then it also states to not harm or kill anyone.

What's that all about then? Which is it. If somebody chops up my dog do I chop them back?

Eye for an eye is about equal revenge. The "don' kill people" was part of a covenent pertaining only to Jews. They'e not allowed to kill Jews, they can still kill anyone else as their laws don' pertain to the rest of humanity. That's why they also have commnds to take slaves, kill entire ethnic groups, and so on. It's a fucking barbaric religion.

 

[SaiWa]

I don't necessarily agree with taking an "eye for an eye" but I do wish we had much, much stricter punishment for certain things.

For example- rape, murder, any child diddling stuff, robbery, government corruption. Those should all be death penalty, and the death penalty should be as soon as possible. Any shred of doubt and no deal but if they are caught red handed- shoot them that very day and be done with it.

Bolded on agreed parts.. Robbery?.. hmmmm maybe if its more than a certain amount... like 10 million.. I dunno.

Regardless of whether you are Republican or Democrat (or useless independent) I LIKE THE WAY YOU THINK!

 

[Devout Pessimist]

It depends on who the law is being applied to. If it is applied to killers, rapists and pedophiles, then I fully support it.

 

[SaiWa]

It depends on who the law is being applied to. If it is applied to killers, rapists and pedophiles, then I fully support it.

what does your Bible say?

 

[RetiredSlave]

I disagree with it but I recognize it as part of human nature as well.

 

[JonnyRingo84]

I'm not too clued up on this but in the bible it states "eye for an eye" yes? But then it also states to not harm or kill anyone.

What's that all about then? Which is it. If somebody chops up my dog do I chop them back?

hammurabi's code is the first mention of the "eye for an eye" law, and this predates the bible/torah etc.

as for the OP, the govt. is wrong all the time about convictions. we're human, and those who work in the govt. are human. many eye for an eye punishments, cannot be corrected. you cant give a person who turns out to be innocent of shoplifting, their hand back.

as gandhi said, "the world will go blind."

 

[Devout Pessimist]

what does your Bible say?

It says to reasonably respect the authority of the state.

 

[freaky]

I like it. It would prevent many crimes. If you steal something, you get their hands off like in medieval days. Commit rape, cut your thingy off. Commit murder, send him to the front lines to get blasted.

 

[bufetadanacara]

Bolded on agreed parts.. Robbery?.. hmmmm maybe if its more than a certain amount... like 10 million.. I dunno.

Regardless of whether you are Republican or Democrat (or useless independent) I LIKE THE WAY YOU THINK!

Robbery is theft via force. It should be punishable by death. I didn't mention shoplifting.

 

[Bacco]

So if someone rapes me I have to rape them back?

 

[SaiWa]

Robbery is theft via force. It should be punishable by death. I didn't mention shoplifting.

oh yeah forgot about the physical aspect of robbery. my bad.

but still my answer is maybe. if there was an actual lasting physical damage as a result from it (paralyzed from a gunshot) then sure. if he pushed the guy on the ground with a baton or the butt of a gun and robbed that person... meh... I don't think the death penalty is warranted... a violent public asswhopping via canning along with a long prison sentence would suffice.

 

[jimbob27]

I like it. It would prevent many crimes. If you steal something, you get their hands off like in medieval days. Commit rape, cut your thingy off. Commit murder, send him to the front lines to get blasted.

Why not go even more primitive and re-introduce mass castration into the penal system? If you've got the suspect restrained, why bother hacking off random body parts when you've got the opportunity to take the two most valuable?

 

[Ceez]

this also means that if someone kills one of your relatives or something, you get to kill one of theirs right? stupid

Get to kill the one that killed yours. If it was ill intent I have no issue with this.

 

[1pedestrian]

A sense of sadistic retaliation is an evolutionary advantage.

 

[milliniar]

So Muslims are more observant of the Christian bible than Christians ...

The old testament laws/rules don't apply to Christian's because of the new covenant.

 

[tonni]

Get to kill the one that killed yours. If it was ill intent I have no issue with this.

not how it's practiced in Albania though. you get to kill their son if they kill yours, for example