The saying of “eye for an eye” was used in many religions and it was the law of retaliation. It is the idea that if one person has injured another, they receive a penalty that is similar to what they did. This law does not seem to apply to the world today.

This principle was used in Hammurabi’s Code and also in Judaism. An example used in the code was that if a man injures another, the same injury will be inflicted on them as punishment. Though the principle sounds reasonable, it is too harsh to use today.

There are many criminals in the world that commit murder and just have to serve jail time. If “eye for an eye” principle still applied, crime rates would decrease because people will not want to have the same crime that they committed inflicted upon them. If an individual murdered another, they would not want to be killed themselves, so this would lessen the chances of someone taking that kind of action.

This principle of revenge could be too harsh because there are people who have been arrested and put in jail, but are later proven innocent after new evidence is revealed. An eye for an eye would not be fair if the person is punished even though they are innocent, so there would have to be clear evidence that the person is guilty.

An eye for an eye would not work in our society today because there are so many different situations. Everyone deserves a fair trial and violence needs to be kept to a minimum. As a society, people may not agree with the principle and this disagreement could lead to protesting and more violence.

Punishments in society today are not equal as the crime, as criminals are either over punished or under punished. Criminals such as Casey Anthony or George Zimmerman killed people but they are walking around free today. Ricky Jackson was put in jail for 39 years and he turned out to have been innocent. Punishments should only be taken if proven guilty. These will not use the eye for an eye principle because it does not exist in society today.