If this is a post of opinion, then I’ll be writing in favor of both sides, and you can pick whichever one you agree with most.
Modern lawmakers should use the philosophy of “An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth,” because the only way to ensure true justice is to reflect what the guilty has done to the victim upon himself, so as to not exercise an unequal punishment.
Modern Lawmakers should not use the philosophy of “An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth,” because the acts that the guilty did upon the victim may reflect as cruel or unusual punishment upon the guilty, thus making the philosophy unconstitutional.
Please mark brainliest if this helped!
