You have no freaking pity! There's evidence of this right here:
Yup, your brain is actually not processing correctly if you don't see the contradiction in that.
I asked what the contradiction was, after you told me that my brain is actually (actually) not processing correctly, I ignored the ad hominem, and asked about the contradiction, thinking.. contradiction??
Nah at this point my social self is fed up. Use your abomination of a brain to figure it out yourself.
And now you're fed up? After you attacked my character and now you want me to use my brain, which you just used to attack my character, you have no pity, no wonder you want vengeance, and believe restitution to be impossible because you cannot go back in time, there is only one option, and this I have presumed from the get go, and now it's concluded here finally, you believe there is only vengeance and nothing else, only option a.
You have no pity, I don't want your pitty, you're pathetic yourself, you get attacked by labels like idiot after I demonstrated how and why you're an idiot, then fight with the windmills of my big bad dragon self, trying to attack my brain, since resolving what a person said about your self is "he called me an idiot, I got to call him an idiot back", keep reflecting and all that.
Well, I only turn the cheek so often. But I am no person that does not grant merci:
"Vengeance can imply retribution, they mean exactly the same things."
"can" is the import word here, it indirectly states that vengeance does not imply retribution at least some of the time. Therefore the only none contradicting statements you could have made are:
"Vengeance implies retribution, they mean exactly the same things."
"Vengeance can imply retribution, they sometimes mean exactly the same things."
I would rather agree with the 2nd statement but anyways getting hung up about what is the right definition is not healthy. We should just agree on one and move on to actually discussing topics instead of words.
... you agreed on the punishment of outlawing murderers (Vogelfreiheit). Yet you still argue that punishment is wrong as a concept.
Definitions in dictionaries are just a mere reflection of the most common definitions. So we just need to get the definition straight for us at this point. Punishment is for me preventing the incident to happen again and resocialize the person in question. I don't want to condition criminal humans, I want to help them
I never agreed on that. Who is this "we"?
'Making a thing whole again' or what you call 'resituation' is a concept that has been frowned upon in any decent philosophy. Things change, I hope you do too some day