Well you can replace the word revenge with retribution and that dresses up the word right because even though they are synonyms they have different senses. Yet there is no question that embodied in American jurisprudence is the concept that the state's legitimate penalogical interest is based on incapacitation, deterrence, rehabilitation AND retribution.
But the state needs to short circuit this so that its punishment replaces the private retribution in a way that most reasonable people would say, "I don't need to seek revenge because what the state did to you was enough" And the reason that is important is because if the state doesn't do that in a way where a person feels enough punishment has been meted out (and as a society we're constantly addressing this), the more likely people will engage in personal vigilantism/feuds and the like.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...nge-evolution/
"
The loudest way to exact revenge is to make a person's gains less profitable. You have reached into their accounting system and changed what they've gained from harming you.
The interesting thing is that the desire for revenge goes up if there are people who have watched you be mistreated, because in that case, the costs have gotten bigger. If you don't take revenge, there's a chance that people will learn that you are the type of person who will put up with mistreatment. "
Uh no, you're way off base with that example.