Introduction
Matters related to the justice system are often highly debated, as many proposed solutions can be controversial. For example, in their work “Restitution vs. Imprisonment,” Charles Colson and Daniel Benson discuss the benefits of the restitution model, which would make restitution the primary form of punishment. However, given the outdated Biblical perspective and the model’s financial and systemic unsustainability, it should not be implemented.
Argument Critique
Colson and Benson’s argument is unpersuasive because the program’s effects are ambiguous. Regarding the positive effect, the initiative might offer a victim-centered approach to justice, helping victims heal from their injuries. In France, restitution payments settle 50% of criminal proceedings. By preventing needless imprisonment, sufferers, taxpayers, and offenders all benefit.
At the same time, there can be significant issues with implementing such a program. For example, offenders may differ in their capacity to make restitution, leading to unfairness within the system. Furthermore, applying restitution can be challenging because not all crimes have obvious, measurable consequences. Therefore, there are more negative aspects associated with the implementation of the given method.
Biblical Perspective
Moreover, according to the Bible, restitution is an act of compensation or payback that an offender makes to a victim to make up for the harm or loss they have caused. Its foundation is the idea of settling issues and administering justice. As said in Proverbs 6:30-31, “If he is caught, he must pay sevenfold, though it costs him all the wealth of his house.”
In other words, if a judge finds the person responsible guilty, they are required to compensate those who were harmed for the damage that they caused. In this case, the Biblical model aligns with Colson and Benson’s argument. Meanwhile, one should understand that biblical times were different from today, and modern issues are more complex, which is why the program will not work.
Conclusion
In summary, given the model’s financial and systemic unsustainability, coupled with its outdated Biblical perspective, its implementation is not justified. The use of the specified approach is accompanied by additional drawbacks connected to fairness and the capacity to make restitution. It is essential to realize that the program will not function because contemporary problems are more complicated, and the biblical periods were different from today’s.
References
Bible. n.d. Proverbs 6:30-31. New International Version.
Daigle, Leah E., and Muftic, Lisa R. 2019. “Financial Remedy.” In Victimology: A Comprehensive Approach. SAGE Publications.
Waller, Irvin. 2019. “Putting Victims at Zenith.” In Science and Secrets of Ending Violent Crime (pp.95-113). Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Van Ness, Daniel W., Heetderks Strong, Karen, Derby, Jonathan, Parker, Lynette L. 2022. “The Development of a New Pattern of Thinking.” In Restoring Justice: An Introduction to Restorative Justice. Taylor & Francis.