Accuser's Right to Choose Punishment When Accused Found Guilty.

[Mr Black]

Something that bothers me about the today's legal system is that people who are found guilty of heinous crimes and get off way too easy. Why should the victim or accuser be able to choose punishment ? Within reason, it would be perfectly fair.

I am not saying robbery should have the punishment of death. Lets say the government could set the range of punishment and the accuser/victim would get to choose. So the death of a family member , if you are the accuser you would get to choose the number of years, max/min security, General population, etc.

Thoughts ?

EDIT: According to Lunatoon, this is called shariah law.

 

[Hookups]

Well, I guess.

But you have to understand the mindset the victim(s) would be in. We would have TONS of people serving 25 to life, or even having the death penalty. (In applicable states)

 

[LunaToon]

That's how shariah law works.

If someone is killed, the family of the deceased can choose one of three options.

1. Have him killed.
2. Have him pay blood money
3. Family can forgive the guy and he is free to go.

Although I'd hate to have shariah law in our legal system, this bit makes more sense than sending someone to a cell where they are fed and taken care of even if it's minimal. They still use a shit load of tax payer money to take care of these sad fucks.

 

[Mr Black]

That's how shariah law works.


Although I'd hate to have shariah law in our legal system, this bit makes more sense than sending someone to a cell where they are fed and taken care of even if it's minimal. They still use a shit load of tax payer money to take care of these sad fucks.

It makes a lot of sense to me, why would you want to feed and house someone who is just hurting the government and it's people too. I understand it would be a bit harsh, like the other poster said, the mind frame of the victims would be harsh. But most crimes, murder, rape armed robbery etc is pretty harsh.