Nathanson Argues That an Adequate System of Punishment Could Never

Multiple Choice

Nathanson argues that an adequate system of punishment could never be designed purely on the basis of "an eye for an eye" principles because:

A) There is no objective way to rank the severity of different types of criminal activity.
B) They focus too strongly on the motivations and underlying intentions of the criminal.
C) They offer no plausible guidance on how to punish many types of criminal activity.
D) They wrongly focus on the contexts of particular crimes, rather than on types of crime.