Victim Compensation Thesis
The Basis for Victim Compensation
According to Victimology, victim compensation takes place when “the state, rather than the perpetrator, reimburses the victim for losses sustained at the hands of the criminal” cite. Advocates of victim compensation believe it’s the government’s obligation to compensate citizens who suffer harm, and they justify this view by using two distinct philosophical positions as a basis for their reasoning: The social contract and the notion of social welfare.
The Social Contract Argument
According to the Encyclopedia of Philosophy, the social contract theory is the view “that persons’ moral and/or political obligations are dependent upon a contract or agreement among them to form the society in which they live.” A …show more content…
For example, the social welfare view may require an assessment of a victim’s income to determine whether they’re eligible for government compensation, while the social contract view compensates everybody, regardless of their financial status. Government’s Victim Compensation Obligation
I believe the government has an obligation to provide victim compensation based on the social contract; The view that government protects citizen rights in exchange for citizen obedience and is therefore liable for any harm its citizens suffer. To justify my view, I consider the harmful effects that result from the absence of reconciliation between state and citizen.
Social Contract and the Rule of Law The U.S. government derives its power from the consent of the people. The Declaration of Independence refers to this consenting sovereign citizenry as the “just powers” of government. While the legitimacy of authority comes at the expense of certain rights, the people do not surrender them to legitimize the rule of an arbitrary government (a government of unlimited power and discretion). Rather, the governed consent to a type of authority in which every citizen—both the ruler and the ruled—is subject to, known as the rule of
According to Victimology, victim compensation takes place when “the state, rather than the perpetrator, reimburses the victim for losses sustained at the hands of the criminal” cite. Advocates of victim compensation believe it’s the government’s obligation to compensate citizens who suffer harm, and they justify this view by using two distinct philosophical positions as a basis for their reasoning: The social contract and the notion of social welfare.
The Social Contract Argument
According to the Encyclopedia of Philosophy, the social contract theory is the view “that persons’ moral and/or political obligations are dependent upon a contract or agreement among them to form the society in which they live.” A …show more content…
For example, the social welfare view may require an assessment of a victim’s income to determine whether they’re eligible for government compensation, while the social contract view compensates everybody, regardless of their financial status. Government’s Victim Compensation Obligation
I believe the government has an obligation to provide victim compensation based on the social contract; The view that government protects citizen rights in exchange for citizen obedience and is therefore liable for any harm its citizens suffer. To justify my view, I consider the harmful effects that result from the absence of reconciliation between state and citizen.
Social Contract and the Rule of Law The U.S. government derives its power from the consent of the people. The Declaration of Independence refers to this consenting sovereign citizenry as the “just powers” of government. While the legitimacy of authority comes at the expense of certain rights, the people do not surrender them to legitimize the rule of an arbitrary government (a government of unlimited power and discretion). Rather, the governed consent to a type of authority in which every citizen—both the ruler and the ruled—is subject to, known as the rule of