Talk:Lexa/@comment-26189128-20150425094958/@comment-26288439-20150430031645

To @TheOmegaWerewolf, i think you are right, in a way, but also not in another.

Yes, grounders didn't show mercy to criminals, and didn't go for quick death. And yes, banisment is actually a quite good solution.....for smaller crimes. BUT I think if we try to imagine ourselves into the Grounders' (leaders') point of view, the punisment of a guilty person has two points here. To remove the criminal from the society, to stop him from commiting further crimes AND also warning the rest about commiting the same crime. I think banishment is a quite good alternative, but not in all cases. If you banish a bunch of criminals, especially violent ones, there is nothing to stop them from forming gangs and come back to you even stronger. Banishing someone is not bad, but it's not getting the point accross as well. Also, i don't think that is an actually good and wise way of looking at things, but one could question, why respect a person's life and survival, or they have neglected to do the same for others? One could also argue, that killing is killing. I have never died before (that is ine weird sentence), but I think death is death, and obviously, I would rather be stabbed quickly and die in a minute relatively painlessly, than to suffer, but if we consider the second use of these executions, the public display and warning, than a more painful death is more effective.