Eye for an Eye: Blinded Acid Victim to have Attacker Blinded
 

http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/...tim/index.html

So summarize the article, a young woman was blinded by having acid thrown into her face by a man she refused to become involved with. Rather than accept a common practice whereby she would accept a hefty fine rather than harsh punishment, she instead has insisted that the attacker be blinded in the same manner, with acid in his eyes.

The suggestion was accepted, and the attacker's appeal has failed. His sentence will be carried out relatively soon, and he will receive drops of acid in each eye, blinding him.

What do you think about eye for an eye justice and what circumstances, if any, is it an acceptable policy and why?

Honestly, for me, "Eye for an eye" is never Ok. You take in account the situation, but not the people. A person, in a feat of rage or in an unstable momment of their lives can commit vile acts, planned or not. To respond in the same manner, you're just being as (or more) vile yourself.

It's not a proper responde, simply because you'll never get a large group of people to agree to a middleground on this matter. Worst... people think that if it's "An Eye for an Eye", they should be the ones judging and carrying out the punishment... not only that, but, being a minor portion or not... accident do happen. If a cop kills someone in a legitimy accident, and the family demands this as "justice"... what's going to be? If they dont carry the punishment, because it was an accident, then, everybody will claim "accident". And down we go into the gray area of a logic lost in a crowd. But if they do carry out the punishment, then, people would be saying that "it's ok to kill a innocent for the greater justice everynow and then" and that's never ok with me.

also... from the article

That's what i would call class A bullshit. It's revenge.

The article says that it isn't just a fit a rage though.

It was repeated and increasingly dangerous harassment, at least according to her.

Normally I would find this a horrific return to an ancient system of Law, where civilized consequences and judgments mean nothing.


But then there's that little part of me in the back that says the guy totally deserved to lose his sight for what he did.
It's a tough issue to be sure.

I believed it was Gandhi who said "An eye for an eye and you shall be blind."

Now I am torn on this issue. What the guy did was petty and stupid. Blinding a woman for saying no, that is pretty harsh. But on the other side of the coin, blinding him will do nothing. She has to pay for these surgeries and lacks the funds to do so. Why she didn't go after him in the pocket book where it would hurt most.

Because she wants to hurt him where he'll feel it forever?

I think we all hear this story and a part of us thinks, "he deserves every horrible pain his life brings," but another part of us, an enlightened part, says, "nobody deserves to have such a crippling punishment inflicted on them."

It comes down to a battle between what we want to be justice and what justice has to be.

I do agree with this. To commit this kind of permanent assault upon someone simply because they do not wish to accept your advances or demands is absolutely sickening. It was a barbaric act from a barbaric mind. Honestly, I'm rather surprised to not hear of a rape in this case.

I might be the only dissenting voice in our forum here, but I must disagree. He does deserve to be punished in this fashion. His victim did not deserve her fate, and to do something less than permanent would teach him absolutely nothing. We can claim enlightenment, and other such terms, and perhaps it is true. However, their ways are not our ways... their culture is not ours. It is a completely different world over there, where women do not have the same kind of rights as men, where women in families are often raped by men whose "honor" has been slighted by people the women are related to. They are often treated as second-or-third-class citizens, to be beaten as animals, or stoned to death for something as little as revealing their faces in public.

For this, I can only agree with the court's decision. Let him be blinded in return, to serve as an example to other would-be barbarians who would commit this kind of harm upon another human being for something so petty. Perhaps, in his blindness, he and others will finally see the error of their committed acts.

I was going to post, but then hatake Kakashi stole my post from the future and said exactly what I wanted to. Eye for an eye might be considered barbaric but it is certainly a deterrent, in the immediate sense for this man, and in a greater sense for those others who would commit such an atrocity. They may not be so quick to blind someone with acid if they know the courts will rule in favor of them being blinded as well.

Besides, screw his human rights. He blinded someone with acid out of jealous rage. That's inhuman.

Well, i dont mind that as long as other people dont get ideas over this and start to demand that sort of response out of other courts, or simply going all Judge Dredd on their own...