What are Stone for Stone and the Threshold Deficient Method?
To understand it another way, let's compare two methods of dealing: one is stone for stone (SFS), and the other is the Threshold Deficient Method (TDM), one that does not satisfy the minimum threshold for preventing future cases (by far, there is no effective way other than the SFS strategy) (the replacement method has a limited scope and is largely a way to deal with special cases).
A reasonable person can easily conclude that it is better to take vengeance on a criminal to save a hundred lives (simple math ratio) rather than to preserve a criminal and put a hundred lives at risk (it’s simple). (In practice, the effectiveness of the SFS strategy defines itself, i.e. its results, the number of future cases and the sense of security in the society, settle the matter on their own; however, these results can only be achieved when the retraction of the sources (see Step 2) is carried out alongside.)
From Is Retribution Essential?.
Comparing Stone for Stone with the Threshold Deficient Method
The measure as written
The rule of IS RETRIBUTION ESSENTIAL? weighs a guilt first by the disturbance it causes. Under the provocation amount, it gives the direction of the retribution and its limit:
(Usually, by increasing the retribution level, the level of eruption of future cases diminishes.) (This must be tuned to a manageable value such that there is no illegitimate retribution, as this can spread chaos in the society.)
For a damage that cannot be undone, it gives two ways:
(Is the damage reversible or not, and if reversible, then how many resources are to be diverted to fix it?) If the damage is irreversible (i.e. loss of life or of any body part), then there should be a strategy of stone for stone or the replacement method.
Under "Stone for Stone (SFS)", it states the aim:
It's true that no matter how much retribution is in place, the damage is irreversible, and truly, in such cases, we are not concerned with replacing the material damage, as we cannot do that in reality. The only solution is to prevent further cases of such magnitude.
and why a lesser retribution does not reach it:
Life imprisonment is not the solution, as it doesn't provide the required threshold to stop a considerable influx of future cases (if you really feel that the person truly intends to leave the wrong way and adopt a normal life, then there is a replacement method available).
It then compares the two methods: