Lex Talonis or not?

buschmaster

I came across this news article. http://news.sky.com/home/world-news/article/16041023

the woman was blinded and disfigured when acid was thrown in her face. the attacker was caught, convicted, and she had the option of having the same thing done to him as he did to her. literally, putting acid in his eye causing it to go blind.

she chose not to have it done "so that the suffering I went through is not repeated."

that was in a different country. (the fact that it was a muslim country is immaterial, we're considering laws in general) it got me to thinking. we in this country have laws that do not provide for violence as part of "punishment" for crimes. we seem to find it distasteful.

so, if you were in the same situation as the above victim, what would you do?

and if you say you would have his eye put out, would you also say you would like the option of "Lex Talonis" in our laws (applying to all of us, not just for your benefit) instead of just sending convicted assailants to prison?

DRP-AZ

An eye for an eye. The Old Testament rocks.

mrseatle

Good girl, but I take ten eyes for an eye, just to be sure.

givette

Lex Luther would have been much more severe.

n/a

Would be stupid, to blind the guy, then some poor person would have to take care of him.

anatomically correct

"An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth..." A quick, efficient way to a eyeless, toothless world.

Mr. Perfect

Eye for eye tooth for tooth, is a wonderful system, which works quite well, so long as its viewed as intended-- the maximum penalty, where mercy can be sprinkled in as the victim sees fit.