What is the ideal purpose of punishing criminals, how do we know when punishment has been adequately served, what would be an appropriate and morally justifiable punishment for Raskolnikov and why? Said Elbert Hubbard, "We are punished for our sins, not for them." Prince Machiavelli created the Machiavellian Code in which he stated the principle "An eye for an eye". What is the purpose of punishment? Why does mankind find it necessary to punish transgressors? Hubbard believed that punishment was not necessary to reform criminals, but Machiavelli believed that it was necessary to bring all those who broke the law to justice. The purpose of punishment is to reform the behavior of criminals, and punishment is properly served when the criminal is truly reformed. Whoever made a mistake must be brought to justice. This statement is the founding belief of every legal system ever created, but does justice necessarily mean punishment? Justice is fairness in how people are treated. Punishment is punishment for doing something wrong. Using these definitions of the words justice and punishment, Machiavelli's eye for an eye model seems to make sense. To justify a murder you must take the life of the murderer. To bring justice to someone who stole a hundred dollars you must take a hundred dollars from the wrongdoer. The purpose of punishment is to justify the offender's crimes. This causes very contradictory thinking in human psychology. From an early age we are taught that two wrongs don't make a right, yet in our society punishment goes against this fundamental rule. The question of bringing justice to a criminal through Machiavellian punishment needs to be revisited because of this paradox that emerges in human thinking. Hubbard disagreed with Machiavelli and said that "we are punished for our sins, not for them." The guilt of the sins committed punishes the criminal. Depending on how heinous the crime was, the criminal will be subjected to a different level of guilt. If he steals a candy bar he will feel a little remorse, but probably not enough to stop him from doing it again. If a murder has been committed, as in the case of Raskolnikov, the guilt is so great that it drives the man mad. The American legal system uses both of these ideas. When a man steals a candy bar and is caught, he is forced to repay the store owner for everything he stole.