After reading both “Can Your Genes Make You a Murderer” and “Pity the Poor Murderer, His Genes Made Him Do it”by Nigel Barber, I have to say that I don’t agree with the defense that a gene might explain violent behavior. Or maybe it can be put in another way that I agree with Nigel Barber that such a gene does not exonerate a convicted felon. As for me, the defense that a gene might explain violent behavior seems to get the murderer out of his responsibility in committing a crime, which may endanger the law system in the long run.

It can be understood in this way that the criminals can always say that they are unconscious and it is their gene that drives them to commit a crime, leading to their getting away from their supposed punishment in the end. As a result, more and more people won’t be afraid of the law system anymore and they can defend that they are not intentional and premeditated due to the effect of their gene. Taking the effectiveness of the law system into consideration, I would rather choose that a gene cannot explain violent behavior.

At the same time, the defense that a gene might explain violent behavior also confuses the idea that everyone has to take the responsibility for their own behaviors under whatever circumstances, resulting in people’s not acting after their second thoughts. Personally speaking, I hold that the negative actions are a result of nature and nurture to a small extent but instead that the individuals have to be responsible to a large extent. That is to say, the individuals are responsible for all the negative actions they have taken and the rationale why they will do those negative actions are out of themselves. However, what cannot be denied is that nature and nurture will really influence whether the individuals will take the negative actions or not while such influential extent is not large when compared with the individuals’ responsibility.