Hammurabi’s code of laws had a very basic concept of punishment. If you killed somebody, you die. If you are a thief, you are robbed of your hands, etc. I personally agree with the “eye for an eye” philosophy. Though it may have been “primitive” compared to today’s standards, it was rather effective; more effective than, in my opinion, today’s system of imprisonment. “Do unto others; what you wish others to do to you.” It’s very simple and plain. It is enough for any mind to comprehend. There is no need for legal code or expensive sentencing procedures. If the crime was done, then we know exactly how to punish the perpetrator and the perpetrator will know exactly how he will be punished. In fact, the fear of being punished may even deter criminals from breaking the law in the first place. The one reason that I suggest that we lesson the consequences of crime is because we are, obviously, more civilized than the inhabitants of ancient Mesopotamia. Amputation of hands or other brutal legal retributions are not needed or allowed by the U.S. Constitution for crimes such as robbery and such. However for crimes such as assault, a counter-assault could serve as a fitting punishment. If that crime were to escalate in severity and delve into murder, then the only fitting punishment that I believe should be is the death penalty. The existence of the death penalty is vital to improvement of America’s crime rates. If someone is surely convicted of murder in cold-blood, then I believe by all means, they should be put to death. Every day, people convicted of murder are imprisoned for life or a couple of decades. “Why is that necessary?” I ask. Why are murderers being given 3 hot meals and shelter, albeit a terrible one, for killing somebody? In the book “Monster”, Steve describes the horror of the prisons. The prison is only horrible for innocent people like him. I am sure that somewhere, there are some hardened killers in prison, and they enjoy it. They relish in the violence and they are the ones that instigate the horrible beatings and rapes that occur within the cell blocks. Why give them the chance to inflict more pain upon other human beings? According to certain documents, the trials for the death penalty cost more than a life-time supply of prison chili. If that is the case, then why have a trial? If they are convicted of murder in any degree and show no remorse, then I say, straight to death row. As for the chili, why not send it to people who need it and actually deserve it? The world could be that much better if there was a death penalty.