Seven states bar people with a criminal record from receiving victim's compensation

[Angrboda]

It may be a deterrent, but that doesn't justify it on its own. This seems like an example of cruel and unusual punishment. Once a person has been punished for a crime, we then punish them again for having been a criminal. And what's worse, it punishes people related to the person who aren't criminals at all! It would be like not allowing criminals to hold jobs. Sure, they're less deserving in some sense, and it would deter people from committing crimes, but how absurd would that be even given those justifications. This is just a lesser form of the same thing. Supposedly, after one has served one's time, one is then allowed to participate fully in society as any other member can. I'm not sure what the rules are about felons who have served their time voting, but it seems that once a person has paid their debt to society, their participation in society shouldn't just be arbitrarily limited because it might deter some people from committing crimes. I don't see how this serves a useful purpose at all, or at least not a justifiable purpose. I have issues with civil commitment, too, where a sex offender is locked up in a mental facility indefinitely because they still pose a danger to society long after a criminal committing an equally grave offense would have been released. These justifications only go so far before they bleed into things that are clearly not right.