![]() ![]() ![]() The punishments were harsh and unreasonable and included severe punishments like death penalties. It was a means to get rid of crimes in the state and keep the nation safe, but it was a terrible way of enforcing the law. It ensured that people obeyed the laws and that people got punishments according to their crimes. It was a fair system with strict, simple rules and helped keep crimes at bay because of the harsh punishments. The code helped maintain social order and have an organized society. He revised and expanded older collections of Sumerian and Akkadian laws while formulating the code. So with the help of his artisans, he codified the laws in the country intending to promote social cohesion and administration in the country and publicized it to show transparency in his governance. As his empire expanded, he found it difficult to administer a large and diverse group of people. The code was promulgated by King Hammurabi of Babylon, who ruled over much of Mesopotamia from 1792 to 1750 BC. But the codes were not based on equality there were stratification and differences in punishments based on class and gender. ![]() The code followed the principle of lex talionis, the law of retributive justice where the criminal gets punishment equal to the one they inflicted on the victim i.e., “an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth”. It was looted and later rediscovered by a team of French archaeologists in Susa, Iraq. They were carved into massive, finger-shaped, black stone stele and dates back to 1754 BC. In fact, the only true crime that regularly employs retribution as the primary rationale of punishment is in cases where the death penalty is imposed.The code of Hammurabi containing 282 laws is one of the oldest written laws codes in the world. For example, where would you draw the line? What do you do in cases of murder, rape, theft, etc.? The problems are obvious and this is why most sentences, despite what most people think, are not based on the concept of retribution. If a person commits a harm is not the most appropriate sentence to have the harm done to them? For example, if someone commits a battery should a battery be done to them? Emotionally this feels right but in practice it is fraught with problems. This scenario begs the question of what sentencing should be in criminal cases. Her choice: she could serve 30 days in jail or let the victim spray her with pepper spray. The women chose to be sprayed. It is with this form of punishment we turn to a recent bit of news that begs the question whether "eye for an eye" is the best route.Ī judge in Ohio recently gave an women convicted of assault by pepper spray a creative option for sentencing. If you cause harm, the system will punish you for your actions. The person going to prison deserves their punishment as it fits the crime. Lastly, there is retribution or what is commonly called "eye for an eye." When most people think of incarceration and criminal sentences, they think of this rationale. For example, if people know that to commit murder could result in the death penalty, they should be deterred from committing murder to avoid such punishment. Here, we punish crimes to deter persons from committing similar acts in the future. That is, if a person is in prison, they no longer have the ability (in theory) to harm society - they are incapacitated from doing so. This method focuses on the harm a person could cause in the future to rationale putting the person in prison. The emphasis is on things like drug treatment programs, education, and classes. People should be sentenced in a way to rehabilitate themselves (hence the California penitentiary system's name: California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation). There are several common rationales for punishment when it comes to sentencing those convicted of crimes.įirst, there is the idea of rehabilitation. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |