Society & Culture15 mins ago
What Is The Difference Between Justice And Revenge
22 Answers
Always a lot of talk on AB about prisons been soft/prisons are hell.
Bring back hanging/ don't bring back hanging
eye for an eye/there always mitigating circumstances
etc
SO, just what is the difference between justice and the desire fore revenge?
Is an objective view re: punishment for offenders even possible?
Bring back hanging/ don't bring back hanging
eye for an eye/there always mitigating circumstances
etc
SO, just what is the difference between justice and the desire fore revenge?
Is an objective view re: punishment for offenders even possible?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by nailit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.perhaps it would be fairer to say it's about the law being enforced impartially. Parliament are responsible for the law, including requiring hard labour for gays.
The point of the law is to replace revenge. In the Middle Ages law was pretty much private and based on vendettas: you killed someone, his brother would come after you. This led to more or less anarchy. Eventually, a centralised monarchy tried to standardise this on the grounds of imposing the "king's peace". The king appointed judges, sheriffs and so on to administer it all across the country. The idea was to make justic a public thing, not a private one. It's fairly uniform now, with tight sentencing restrictions, though it's taken several centuries to get where we are now.
The point of the law is to replace revenge. In the Middle Ages law was pretty much private and based on vendettas: you killed someone, his brother would come after you. This led to more or less anarchy. Eventually, a centralised monarchy tried to standardise this on the grounds of imposing the "king's peace". The king appointed judges, sheriffs and so on to administer it all across the country. The idea was to make justic a public thing, not a private one. It's fairly uniform now, with tight sentencing restrictions, though it's taken several centuries to get where we are now.
As was said earlier the views of the victim (and by extension, those that sympathise with the victim) will always differ with those of the perpetrator (and by extension, those that sympathise with the perpetrator) so what is *objective* when there are differing points of view. Isnt it all subjective?
And what about a victimless crime? Someone grows a few cannabis plants for there own (sometimes medicinal) use and yet society punishes them for growing a plant? Wheres the objectivity in that? Is it just or is it revenge for growing something for ones own personal use?
And what about a victimless crime? Someone grows a few cannabis plants for there own (sometimes medicinal) use and yet society punishes them for growing a plant? Wheres the objectivity in that? Is it just or is it revenge for growing something for ones own personal use?
nailit - // Wheres the objectivity in that? Is it just or is it revenge for growing something for ones own personal use? //
The objectivity comes in when the sentence is passed down for growing cannabis, which is against the law. The reasons are where emotions and circumstances come in - but the law takes no account of those.
It can't - to function properly, the law has to be impartial, it reacts to the crime, not the reasons behind the crime.
The objectivity comes in when the sentence is passed down for growing cannabis, which is against the law. The reasons are where emotions and circumstances come in - but the law takes no account of those.
It can't - to function properly, the law has to be impartial, it reacts to the crime, not the reasons behind the crime.
//The objectivity comes in when the sentence is passed down for growing cannabis, which is against the law.//
Which is my point andy! Who decides what is objective/subjective law?
It was against the law at one time to be a practicing homosexual, now we see such a law as been backward and barbaric. Might we at one point in the future see it as been backward and barbaric to demonize people who choose to smoke weed?
Which is my point andy! Who decides what is objective/subjective law?
It was against the law at one time to be a practicing homosexual, now we see such a law as been backward and barbaric. Might we at one point in the future see it as been backward and barbaric to demonize people who choose to smoke weed?
In a society that has a justice system the individual forfeits the right to exact justice on those that have transgressed upon him (which would, by most definitions, be “revenge”) and instead concedes that task to the State. The State passes laws through its Parliament and the justice system administers the laws.
“Even if at one time the courts sentenced people to hard labour for been homosexual Mikey
You’re becoming a bit confused, nailit. The purpose of the courts is to apply the law as determined by Parliament. It is not for them to have a view of the justification or morality of the laws that are passed. Nor is it within their remit to query the severity or leniency of the sentences available - although for most legislation the law only lays down maximum sentences. The sentencing guidelines provide assistance on sentencing levels to accommodate the various seriousness of the offence. But within this framework judges and magistrates have considerable discretion to vary the sentences as circumstances dictate.
“Even if at one time the courts sentenced people to hard labour for been homosexual Mikey
You’re becoming a bit confused, nailit. The purpose of the courts is to apply the law as determined by Parliament. It is not for them to have a view of the justification or morality of the laws that are passed. Nor is it within their remit to query the severity or leniency of the sentences available - although for most legislation the law only lays down maximum sentences. The sentencing guidelines provide assistance on sentencing levels to accommodate the various seriousness of the offence. But within this framework judges and magistrates have considerable discretion to vary the sentences as circumstances dictate.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.