So when justice is served, the convicted serves his time in prison, goes on parole, and even pays back restitution in jail. So that person has paid for his crime and justice has been served.
After paying for his crime, that said person is no longer in debted to society anymore. He may have even proved himself worthy by being an outstanding moral prisoner and helped other inmates. He is now out, the victim's family has already got their justice.
So why does the victim's family try to hinder the now free criminal's rights to his personal freedoms. Why does society do this as a whole? If a person has paid his debt to society, after he is released, why should he continue to pay for a debt that has been set by law, if he already paid it?
2007-12-13
13:22:36
·
12 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Society & Culture
➔ Religion & Spirituality
Edit:
So for some it is the easy way out if you repent and all your sins or wrongs are forgiven
For others even if you serve 20yrs your wrongs are not forgiven. So has justice really been served or is the concept of justice just an abyss?
2007-12-13
13:31:12 ·
update #1
Ninja Turtle:
Sounds like you have your own version of hell.
2007-12-13
13:32:01 ·
update #2
Edit:
A person who has a record, knows that even though he has paid is debt to society technically; he basically has never paid is debt to society, literally.
2007-12-14
13:21:59 ·
update #3
Human nature requires that broken trust be re-earned and that takes time and effort on the part of the criminal.
2007-12-13 13:27:43
·
answer #1
·
answered by Mr. E 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
I don't believe they really have a "debt to society," at least not something that can be quantified. Criminals suffer the consequences handed down through law (fines, jail, etc.). Once they've met those requirements, I consider them free and clear, and I have a lot of problems with the restrictions communities are enacting about things like where sex offenders can live. I think it's blatantly unfair. People say its to "protect the children." If we really think that's needed, then these people should be legally handed life sentences, not thrown out onto the streets and then told by government they can't live anywhere.
And honestly, _anyone_ could be a sexual predator. Telling previous offenders where they can live in no way guarantees our children won't be molested by someone else.
2007-12-15 06:59:34
·
answer #2
·
answered by Nightwind 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
We are human with the "Eye for an Eye" way of justice. Some criminals will do their time, but not to long after they get out they commit another crime. Are they truly sorry for what they did? It's all about the Spirit of man.
2007-12-13 15:19:33
·
answer #3
·
answered by Loukinda 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Perhaps because they don't think the penalty was large enough...perhaps while they accept that the person paid the debt to "society" that he or she still hasn't paid the debt to THEM! Personally, if some drunk driver (for example) killed my child and was sentenced to 20 years, I wouldn't think it was enough if 15 or ever the full 20 years later, that person was now allowed to live his life free while my son is still in the grave!
2007-12-13 13:29:52
·
answer #4
·
answered by KAL 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
He had paid the debt to the society, but his debt to the victim and his own conscience would never be paid.
2007-12-13 13:27:59
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I agree with you. In answer to your question, the only answer I can come up with is revenge. If the debt has been payed then the answer "justice" no longer applies. What is left then but revenge.
2007-12-13 13:26:53
·
answer #6
·
answered by mel 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
Because a lot a people believe that a tiger can't change his stripes. In other words, Once a criminal, always a criminal.
2007-12-13 13:26:33
·
answer #7
·
answered by punch 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
My Vietnamese friends are surprised that here in the USA, once you get out of prison, it follows you the rest of your life. In Vietnam, once you get out, all is forgiven and you go on with your life.
2007-12-13 13:26:30
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
First you would have to demonstrate this 'secular society' you speak of. How is the scenario you lay out the fault of this nonexistent 'secular society'?
2007-12-13 13:26:41
·
answer #9
·
answered by tuyet n 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Any particular reason you asked? We can't tell you if we agree with you or not unless you give us the details about the injustice you believe you are being subjected to.
2007-12-13 13:38:45
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋