Crimes and their punishments

When a crime is committed, should the victim be taken into account past their version of events?

To do so would mean committing a crime is somewhat of a lottery. Pick on someone already a little unstable, and you’ll damage their mind a lot more than if they were made of sterner stuff. Then again, pick on someone who is forgiving, and you may not have to face charges at all.

Is it right that two people committing identical crimes against different people will face different punishments just because of the victim’s state of mind?

Should victims be allowed to forgive, even if it may mean the offender is more likely to commit another crime?

No. A person should be punished for what they have specifically done. Not because daddy beat the victim when they were a child.

What if, say, you stole some money from your parents? Should they be able to forgive you, or must it be reported and you given an official warning?

What if, say, you stole some money from your parents? Should they be able to forgive you, or must it be reported and you given an official warning?

Well, the only way they would report you is if they didn’t forgive you. How would the government know otherwise?

Should victims be allowed to forgive, even if it may mean the offender is more likely to commit another crime?

No, because the issue is with the government’s laws. The criminal has broken them and the only way they can be forgiven is if the government is the one doing it.

Well, the only way they would report you is if they didn’t forgive you. How would the government know otherwise?

I mean forgive in the sense of not pressing charges. Do your parents, as victims of a crime, have a duty to report your crime?

No, because the issue is with the government’s laws. The criminal has broken them and the only way they can be forgiven is if the government is the one doing it.

This is more of what I’m getting at. Should a victim (your parents) be allowed to ‘cover up’ your crime?

This is more of what I’m getting at. Should a victim (your parents) be allowed to ‘cover up’ your crime?

Yes, absolutely. This is more a private matter and needs to be addressed within the household and not with the government.

What about if a long-time friend takes a couple of dollars out of your wallet to get something they’re going to share with you?

Now, what about if the guy you’ve been dating for a couple of years and are madly in love with starts beating you up?

Criminals should be punished to dissuade and prevent them reoffending, not for revenge. As such past context is very important.

Jabor, that’s not thievery, that’s screwing with your friend.

Yes, absolutely. This is more a private matter and needs to be addressed within the household and not with the government.

What does privacy have to do with it? You’ve committed a crime, and have not been punished for it. You may be more inclined to break the law in future because you got away with it once.

Criminals should be punished to dissuade and prevent them reoffending, not for revenge. As such past context is very important.

Past context of the victim?

Actually, it is stealing in Jabor’s example.

Past context of the victim?

Other than their relation to the criminal, only insofar as it may substantiate unconfirmed details of the crime.