I have read no sound arguments for retributive "justice". Only assertions that it is necessary.
The problem with retribution is it doesn't really solve the problem. It only serves to sate the bloodlust of those who have suffered. It's a natural inclination, But doesn't stop people from doing harm.
Justice is, Or should be, About 2 things. Protection, And rehabilitation. Inherently there are punishments, As in the interest of protection, Offenders would be removed from the populace and pulled from their day to day life, While the best course of action to maintain protection of the populace from the offender is determined. So, Even in a system that looks only to protect and rehabilitate, It is not some "do nothing" or consequence-less system, As many try to paint it out to be.
In the instances where rehabilitation is possible, It should be a goal. Yes, Determining this would not be easy, But I think it dismissive, And also self-serving to deem it impossible. Rehabilitation, When successful, Would/could bring someone back into society as productive member. When not possible, In the interest of protection, They would not be allowed to go back into the situation where they could cause the harm, Again. This makes it potentially more severe, Inherently, Than "retributive justice", While still not feeding the bloodlusts of those who seek vengeance. . . And exacerbating that mindset.
With the retributive system, While trying to "be fair" and exact "equal suffering" on people, Has been failing. . . We place an X amount of years of incarceration, Which does disrupt their lives and cause suffering, But when they get back out, After "serving their time", They're often not rehabilitated. . . And thus we just reintroduced a dangerous individual into society.
There are so many reasons not to maintain a retributive justice system. . . And, As I've said, A protect and rehabilitate system would naturally have negative consequences, Which could serve as deterrents for those who would be considering committing a crime. . . But it also serves a purpose that retributive systems do not. . . It offers a way to rehabilitate, For those who have issues and are afraid to come forward to seek help. . . Due to the "bloodlust mindsets" that retributive systems promote/exacerbate.
I am not 100% on this. . . But I can't think of a good reason to support/maintain/condone a retributive system.
In the higher moral sense there can be justice without retribution.In order to achieve this justice has to be thought of as a learning process and not just as a punishment for a wrong act.A person has to know why an act is wrong and not just that they might get caught for the act.
There is a saying that "an eye for an eye will make the whole world blind." It is true that people should be sought out and punished for crimes, but in a good society, people can punish offenders without doing so revengefully. Removing freedom or privileges will almost always be enough to drive a lesson home.
Because the average person does not always know every angle of “justice”, i.e. the law. Each person defines their own version of justice. While some people may believe unhealthy retribution is the answer to a bad or unlawful act, you’ll find someone else who believes there is a non violent means that dispenses justice without the need for negative, forceful action. For example: Police vs Robbers. This tells me that there can be justice without individual retribution.
I believe that justice can be found without retribution but I would be hesitant to acknowledge that every action out there doesn’t deserve thoughtful and informed conclusions on each subject. It may not always be the reward that an individual might want, but with justice- does come retribution.
To feel justified over the outcome of a situation, there's not always a need for retribution. Retribution and punishment go hand in hand. Satisfaction can be found without having to punish, justice can be served without retribution. In a case were I have been stolen from and my items are returned to me, I do not need retribution to be served upon the thief to feel justified with the outcome of the situation.
Even in the smallest matters, punishment must fit the crime. Unless it's something petty, or out of necessity or self defense. Rapists, murderers, people who wrong to wrong, and pretend there is no "free will," you deserve what you get. No one else is going to adjust your morality, that's what you do for yourself. You have to be observant. You don't do some of these things "mistakenly." It's those that avoid truth and avoid justice, don't think they should be guilty. That's a psychological thing, and probably also has to deal with how some people were or are being raised. A court of law upholds retribution. Without the rule of law, civilizations would collapse. There is no moral equilibrium. We've all seen people firsthand as children and adult alike try to manipulate fact with opinion. Not all opinions are supported are valid. As an adult, you're responsible for your own well being. Chalk it up to people that don't want to deal with the responsibilities and consequences of their actions. If you know it's wrong, don't do it. Not everyone is schizophrenic. Mental illnesses are at times, sadly the only valid reasons some of these things occur. Some do these things with full conscience and awareness. Some don't. There also are incidents where people want to incite things on entire groups of people for another individuals ignorant acts. If you think not, there is something in the universe that makes sure that retribution happens, and perhaps it is karma. Money bails people out for so long. Honesty and truth may not be the prettiest things in the world, but with those things, comes mercy. There are some things beyond our understanding. But we've seen enough to know certain elements are manipulated to favor situations and things that can turn out disastrous. Whether you believe in it or not, it finds you. It's better to have a relationship with that force than to deny it. Because for so long the fates of far too many have been in the hands of the few, all because some feel a neeed to shirk responsibility for actions. The only lines are between knowingly and unknowingly performing whatever actions therein committed. It's an opinion, but no one should be afraid to be wrong or to speak out. I'm not exactly sure how this website works, but there we go. I've said all I've had to on the matter.
Retribution is defined as "a punishment intended to 'balance the scales'". Therefore any act intended to balance the scales (including community work etc.) is retribution. Without retribution, justice doesn't occur. Take God's holy justice system. Someone has to get retribution. Either it's us in hell or Jesus on the cross. Even God's "mercy" stills requires some form of punishment. We can't have justice if we don't have some sort of punishment to balance the scales.
There is no justice without retribution. Quite simply put, the retribution aspect of justice is what people who are suffering look for. That is the punishment that the criminal receives, and it is in itself the justice. Without retribution, we would only have judicial decisions without and real action. Retribution is a staple of our judicial system.