Actions have consequences

THE “an eye for an eye (and a tooth for a tooth)” approach is already becoming a standard form of compensation in our society.
The principal meaning is that if you believe someone does something wrong, that person should be punished by having the same thing done to them.
A biblical perspective is fixed in the principle of revenge: Punishment is deserved in proportion to the seriousness of an offence.
Our ancestors have taught us to treat others as we would like to be treated, as well as the justice system.
It is unfair to commit a crime without a consequence.
Therefore, the term an eye for an eye, if you choose to steal something you will be required to deal with the consequence.
It is the only way to teach and learn lessons.
But today in society, it is like, you slap me, I return with my relatives or friends and we bash you, even to the extent of sending one to the hospital.
We have come off the primitive and by now should lean towards allowing the law to take its course and let those who wrong feel the full brunt of it.
Punishment is a universal phenomenon.
No human society confronted with violations of its laws or customs leaves itself powerless to impose sanctions.
For all this accrued experience of dealing with offenders, punishment remains a problematic matter under constant debate.

Blocki