There have been quite a few changes over the course of the courts systems, and how victims were viewed then and now. I believe there is always room for improvement in everything, but the way things are now with the state of victims’ rights in America is good. Even though victims get the help of an attorney to represent them sometimes the focus is on the defendant and the result of the trial and not necessarily what had happened to the victim. This act has been revised many times because it has been threatened. The 2004 Crime Victims Right Act was added to the law books to offer victims nous of being taken care off.
“This was the key goal of the sweeping changes in the 2004 Crime Victims’ Rights Act (CVRA), which became the “cutting-edge of the third wave of victims’ rights” (Boland ; Butler, 2009). It ensures that victims that they would have a voice against the defendant that victimized them. In the system, the victim has the rights under law to be protected from the accused defendant. This right sometimes is disrupted, and it makes the individuals feel that they are not being treated justly. There are many states in the United States that have passed laws and have created constitutional amendments to guarantee the protection of the victims’ rights.
Victims try to declare their rights in courts and have been turned down and not allowed to express their rights. Vengeance is a strong word that can definitely hurt someone or multiple people. I do not see any special circumstance in which vengeance is appropriate even if it means breaking the law. I do not think it is worth breaking the law and getting arrested to do something to someone just because one wants to get revenge. I believe in karma, and how everything eventually comes around, whether it is now or later in the future.
Vengeance is especially not worth it if one goes to jail or prison for it. If one is in jail or prison just because one wanted to get back at someone for something bad it should not be worth the time behind bars whether it is one month or five years in prison. I do not agree with the activities of Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests (SNAP). For example, “In November of last year, the Diocese of Wilmington, Delaware, released the names of twenty previous priests about whom the diocese found “credible or substantial complaints of sexual abuse of minors.
” Most of the twenty are dead. Edward M. Dudzinski, however, was still living–although he had not helped as a priest since the 1980s–and resided in Herndon, Virginia” (Sargent, 2007). I do not see that as something that should be made in society by anyone. It is not up to SNAP to advertise other people’s business especially if it has something to do with a topic like that. That the priest is old now and has been paying for all the bad things he has done, and now he is just trying to live calmly until it is time to go.